↓ Skip to main content

Airborne fungi in an intensive care unit

Overview of attention for article published in Brazilian Journal of Biology, July 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
35 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
Airborne fungi in an intensive care unit
Published in
Brazilian Journal of Biology, July 2017
DOI 10.1590/1519-6984.06016
Pubmed ID
Authors

Gonçalves, C. L., Mota, F. V., Ferreira, G. F., Mendes, J. F., Pereira, E. C., Freitas, C. H., Vieira, J. N., Villarreal, J. P., Nascente, P. S.

Abstract

The presence of airborne fungi in Intensive Care Unit (ICUs) is associated with increased nosocomial infections. The aim of this study was the isolation and identification of airborne fungi presented in an ICU from the University Hospital of Pelotas - RS, with the attempt to know the place's environmental microbiota. 40 Petri plates with Sabouraud Dextrose Agar were exposed to an environment of an ICU, where samples were collected in strategic places during morning and afternoon periods for ten days. Seven fungi genera were identified: Penicillium spp. (15.18%), genus with the higher frequency, followed by Aspergillus spp., Cladosporium spp., Fusarium spp., Paecelomyces spp., Curvularia spp., Alternaria spp., Zygomycetes and sterile mycelium. The most predominant fungi genus were Aspergillus spp. (13.92%) in the morning and Cladosporium spp. (13.92%) in the afternoon. Due to their involvement in different diseases, the identified fungi genera can be classified as potential pathogens of inpatients. These results reinforce the need of monitoring the environmental microorganisms with high frequency and efficiently in health institutions.

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 35 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 35 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 4 11%
Student > Master 4 11%
Student > Postgraduate 3 9%
Researcher 3 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 9%
Other 5 14%
Unknown 13 37%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 6 17%
Immunology and Microbiology 4 11%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 9%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 9%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 6%
Other 1 3%
Unknown 16 46%

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 10 August 2017.
All research outputs
#9,275,612
of 11,595,461 outputs
Outputs from Brazilian Journal of Biology
#94
of 159 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#194,372
of 265,313 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Brazilian Journal of Biology
#3
of 7 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 11,595,461 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 159 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 1.9. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% 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 265,313 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 7 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 4 of them.