↓ Skip to main content

Antibiotic treatment for Burkholderia cepacia complex in people with cystic fibrosis experiencing a pulmonary exacerbation

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, January 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (61st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 tweeters
f1000
1 research highlight platform

Citations

dimensions_citation
24 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
59 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Antibiotic treatment for Burkholderia cepacia complex in people with cystic fibrosis experiencing a pulmonary exacerbation
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, January 2012
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd009529.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Horsley, Alex, Jones, Andrew M

Abstract

Chronic pulmonary infection is one of the hallmarks of lung disease in cystic fibrosis. Infections dominated by organisms of the Burkholderia cepacia complex, a group of at least 17 closely-related species of gram-negative bacteria, are particularly difficult to treat. These infections may be associated with a fulminant necrotising pneumonia, and are greatly feared by patients. Burkholderia cepacia bacteria are innately resistant to many common antibiotics and able to acquire resistance against many more. Since strict patient segregation was introduced to cystic fibrosis medical care, the incidence of the more virulent epidemic strains has fallen, and new infections are more likely to be with environmentally-acquired strains which seem to exhibit less virulence. Nonetheless, exacerbations of respiratory symptoms require effective therapy directed against the dominant bacterial species. Although evidence-based guidelines exist for the treatment of respiratory exacerbations involving Pseudomonas aeruginosa, the most common chronic infection in cystic fibrosis, these cannot be directly extended to Burkholderia cepacia complex infections. The aim of this review is to assess the available trial evidence for choice and application of treatments for Burkholderia cepacia complex infections.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 59 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Italy 1 2%
Ireland 1 2%
Unknown 57 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 11 19%
Other 10 17%
Student > Bachelor 9 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 12%
Student > Postgraduate 5 8%
Other 14 24%
Unknown 3 5%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 29 49%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 9 15%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 7 12%
Immunology and Microbiology 3 5%
Arts and Humanities 2 3%
Other 6 10%
Unknown 3 5%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 13 November 2015.
All research outputs
#2,617,729
of 6,564,711 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#6,318
of 8,102 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#34,192
of 91,136 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#60
of 85 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 6,564,711 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 59th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,102 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.0. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 91,136 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 85 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.