↓ Skip to main content

Accuracy of Burkholderia pseudomallei Identification Using the API 20NE System and a Latex Agglutination Test

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Clinical Microbiology, November 2007
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (60th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (55th percentile)

Mentioned by

wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
50 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
48 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
Accuracy of Burkholderia pseudomallei Identification Using the API 20NE System and a Latex Agglutination Test
Published in
Journal of Clinical Microbiology, November 2007
DOI 10.1128/jcm.00935-07
Pubmed ID
Authors

Premjit Amornchai, Wirongrong Chierakul, Vanaporn Wuthiekanun, Yuvadee Mahakhunkijcharoen, Rattanaphone Phetsouvanh, Bart J. Currie, Paul N. Newton, Nguyen van Vinh Chau, Surasakdi Wongratanacheewin, Nicholas P. J. Day, Sharon J. Peacock

Abstract

In an evaluation of the API 20NE for the identification of Burkholderia spp., 792/800 (99%) Burkholderia pseudomallei and 17/19 (89%) B. cepacia isolates were correctly identified but 10 B. mallei and 98 B. thailandensis isolates were not correctly identified. A latex agglutination test was positive for 796/800 (99.5%) B. pseudomallei isolates and negative for 120 other oxidase-positive gram-negative bacilli.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 48 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Malaysia 1 2%
Brazil 1 2%
Unknown 46 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 19%
Student > Master 9 19%
Student > Postgraduate 8 17%
Researcher 5 10%
Other 4 8%
Other 10 21%
Unknown 3 6%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 18 38%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 13 27%
Immunology and Microbiology 6 13%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 6%
Environmental Science 2 4%
Other 3 6%
Unknown 3 6%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 05 April 2008.
All research outputs
#6,000,988
of 18,456,414 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Clinical Microbiology
#4,835
of 12,111 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#93,209
of 302,212 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Clinical Microbiology
#42
of 108 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 18,456,414 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,111 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.1. 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 302,212 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 60% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 108 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% of its contemporaries.