↓ Skip to main content

Pulmonary Care and Clinical Medicine

Overview of attention for book
Attention for Chapter 26: Identification of Mycobacterium Species by MALDI-TOF Mass Spectrometry
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Readers on

mendeley
38 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.
Chapter title
Identification of Mycobacterium Species by MALDI-TOF Mass Spectrometry
Chapter number 26
Book title
Advances in Experimental Medicine and Biology
Published in
Advances in experimental medicine and biology, June 2017
DOI 10.1007/5584_2017_26
Pubmed ID
Book ISBNs
978-3-31-965468-3, 978-3-31-965469-0
Authors

Neuschlova, M., Vladarova, M., Kompanikova, J., Sadlonova, V., Novakova, E., M. Neuschlova, M. Vladarova, J. Kompanikova, V. Sadlonova, E. Novakova

Abstract

Matrix-assisted laser desorption ionization - time-of-flight (MALDI-TOF) mass spectrometry enables to identify microorganisms by comparison of the protein content with reference spectra in the database. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of phenotypic identification of mycobacteria by MALDI-TOF mass spectrometry in laboratory practice. Seventy five isolates of mycobacteria were identified by molecular and phenotypic method, and the results were compared by MALDI-TOF. For MALDI-TOF, material was processed according to the Bruker Daltonics protocol and Mycobacterial Library database version 2.0, with 313 reference mycobacteria spectra. All except one of the 72 isolates agreed with regard to the species and genus by both methods. Forty three isolates were identified as the M. tuberculosis complex by MALDI-TOF. Thirty one isolates of nontuberculous mycobacteria were consistently identified by both methods to the species level. We conclude that MALDI-TOF mass spectrometry is an accurate method of bacterial identification. Simplicity, speed, and economic availability of the method makes it suitable for mycobacteria identification in a routine laboratory.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 38 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 38 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 6 16%
Researcher 5 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 8%
Other 3 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 8%
Other 7 18%
Unknown 11 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 6 16%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 16%
Immunology and Microbiology 6 16%
Unspecified 2 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 5%
Other 4 11%
Unknown 12 32%
Attention Score in Context

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 18 June 2017.
All research outputs
#17,899,796
of 22,981,247 outputs
Outputs from Advances in experimental medicine and biology
#3,111
of 4,957 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#226,704
of 316,926 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Advances in experimental medicine and biology
#76
of 119 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,981,247 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,957 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.1. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% 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 316,926 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 119 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.