↓ Skip to main content

Impact of antibacterials on subsequent resistance and clinical outcomes in adult patients with viral pneumonia: an opportunity for stewardship

Overview of attention for article published in Critical Care, November 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (90th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (67th percentile)

Mentioned by

31 tweeters


19 Dimensions

Readers on

54 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.
Impact of antibacterials on subsequent resistance and clinical outcomes in adult patients with viral pneumonia: an opportunity for stewardship
Published in
Critical Care, November 2015
DOI 10.1186/s13054-015-1120-5
Pubmed ID

Matthew P. Crotty, Shelby Meyers, Nicholas Hampton, Stephanie Bledsoe, David J. Ritchie, Richard S. Buller, Gregory A. Storch, Marin H. Kollef, Scott T. Micek


Respiratory viruses are increasingly recognized as significant etiologies of pneumonia among hospitalized patients. Advanced technologies using multiplex molecular assays and polymerase-chain reaction increase the ability to identify viral pathogens and may ultimately impact antibacterial use. This was a single-center retrospective cohort study to evaluate the impact of antibacterials in viral pneumonia on clinical outcomes and subsequent multidrug-resistant organism (MDRO) infections/colonization. Patients admitted from March 2013 to November 2014 with positive respiratory viral panels (RVP) and radiographic findings of pneumonia were included. Patients transferred from an outside hospital or not still hospitalized 72 hours after the RVP report date were excluded. Patients were categorized based on exposure to systemic antibacterials: less than 3 days representing short-course therapy and 3 to 10 days being long-course therapy. A total of 174 patients (long-course, n = 67; short-course, n = 28; mixed bacterial-viral infection, n = 79) were included with most being immunocompromised (56.3 %) with active malignancy the primary etiology (69.4 %). Rhinovirus/Enterovirus (23 %), Influenza (19 %), and Parainfluenza (15.5 %) were the viruses most commonly identified. A total of 13 different systemic antibacterials were used as empiric therapy in the 95 patients with pure viral infection for a total of 466 days-of-therapy. Vancomycin (50.7 %), cefepime (40.3 %), azithromycin (40.3 %), meropenem (23.9 %), and linezolid (20.9 %) were most frequently used. In-hospital mortality did not differ between patients with viral pneumonia in the short-course and long-course groups. Subsequent infection/colonization with a MDRO was more frequent in the long-course group compared to the short-course group (53.2 vs 21.1 %; P = 0.027). This study found that long-course antibacterial use in the setting of viral pneumonia had no impact on clinical outcomes but increased the incidence of subsequent MDRO infection/colonization.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 31 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 54 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Japan 1 2%
Ireland 1 2%
Unknown 52 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 11 20%
Researcher 9 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 15%
Student > Master 6 11%
Student > Bachelor 4 7%
Other 8 15%
Unknown 8 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 26 48%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 11%
Immunology and Microbiology 3 6%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 6%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 2%
Other 5 9%
Unknown 10 19%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 16. 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 15 July 2018.
All research outputs
of 16,104,892 outputs
Outputs from Critical Care
of 5,078 outputs
Outputs of similar age
of 368,860 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Care
of 369 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 16,104,892 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,078 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 16.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its peers.
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 368,860 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 369 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 67% of its contemporaries.