↓ Skip to main content

Standard versus biofilm antimicrobial susceptibility testing to guide antibiotic therapy in cystic fibrosis

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

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
3 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
17 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
27 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
Standard versus biofilm antimicrobial susceptibility testing to guide antibiotic therapy in cystic fibrosis
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, November 2012
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd009528.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Waters V, Ratjen F

Abstract

The antibiotics used to treat pulmonary infections in people with cystic fibrosis are typically chosen based on the results of antimicrobial susceptibility testing performed on bacteria traditionally grown in a planktonic mode (grown in a liquid). However, there is considerable evidence to suggest that Pseudomonas aeruginosa actually grows in a biofilm (or slime layer) in the airways of cystic fibrosis patients with chronic pulmonary infections. Therefore, choosing antibiotics based on biofilm rather than conventional antimicrobial susceptibility testing could potentially improve response to treatment of Pseudomonas aeruginosa in people with cystic fibrosis.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 27 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Canada 2 7%
Australia 1 4%
Ireland 1 4%
India 1 4%
Unknown 22 81%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 20 74%
Researcher 16 59%
Student > Bachelor 14 52%
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 48%
Student > Postgraduate 7 26%
Other 24 89%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 37 137%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 15 56%
Unspecified 8 30%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 7 26%
Immunology and Microbiology 7 26%
Other 20 74%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 16 January 2013.
All research outputs
#2,306,725
of 4,507,280 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#5,683
of 7,249 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#35,057
of 73,011 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#69
of 87 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 4,507,280 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,249 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.8. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% 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 73,011 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 87 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 6th percentile – i.e., 6% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.