↓ Skip to main content

Gram Stains: A Resource for Retrospective Analysis of Bacterial Pathogens in Clinical Studies

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, October 2012
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 (84th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (81st percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
57 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
Gram Stains: A Resource for Retrospective Analysis of Bacterial Pathogens in Clinical Studies
Published in
PLOS ONE, October 2012
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0042898
Pubmed ID
Authors

Usha Srinivasan, Sreelatha Ponnaluri, Lisa Villareal, Brenda Gillespie, Ai Wen, Arianna Miles, Brigette Bucholz, Carl F. Marrs, Ram K. Iyer, Dawn Misra, Betsy Foxman

Abstract

We demonstrate the feasibility of using qPCR on DNA extracted from vaginal Gram stain slides to estimate the presence and relative abundance of specific bacterial pathogens. We first tested Gram stained slides spiked with a mix of 10(8) cfu/ml of Escherichia coli and 10(5) cfu/ml of Lactobacillus acidophilus. Primers were designed for amplification of total and species-specific bacterial DNA based on 16S ribosomal gene regions. Sample DNA was pre-amplified with nearly full length 16S rDNA ribosomal gene fragment, followed by quantitative PCR with genera and species-specific 16S rDNA primers. Pre-amplification PCR increased the bacterial amounts; relative proportions of Escherichia coli and Lactobacillus recovered from spiked slides remained unchanged. We applied this method to forty two archived Gram stained slides available from a clinical trial of cerclage in pregnant women at high risk of preterm birth. We found a high correlation between Nugent scores based on bacterial morphology of Lactobacillus, Gardenerella and Mobiluncus and amounts of quantitative PCR estimated genus specific DNA (rrn copies) from Gram stained slides. Testing of a convenience sample of eight paired vaginal swabs and Gram stains freshly collected from healthy women found similar qPCR generated estimates of Lactobacillus proportions from Gram stained slides and vaginal swabs. Archived Gram stained slides collected from large scale epidemiologic and clinical studies represent a valuable, untapped resource for research on the composition of bacterial communities that colonize human mucosal surfaces.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 57 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 2%
Unknown 56 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 17 30%
Student > Master 6 11%
Other 4 7%
Student > Postgraduate 4 7%
Researcher 4 7%
Other 9 16%
Unknown 13 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 11 19%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 9 16%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 9 16%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 2 4%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 4%
Other 8 14%
Unknown 16 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 31 October 2012.
All research outputs
#3,700,887
of 22,681,577 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#45,747
of 193,576 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#26,973
of 172,686 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#834
of 4,570 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,681,577 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 193,576 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% 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 172,686 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4,570 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.