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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Susceptibility to R-pyocins of Pseudomonas aeruginosa clinical isolates from cystic fibrosis patients
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy (JAC), July 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1093/jac/dky261 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Mar Redero, Carla López-Causapé, Javier Aznar, Antonio Oliver, Jesús Blázquez, Ana I Prieto |
| Abstract |
The appearance and dissemination of MDR among pathogenic bacteria has forced the search for new antimicrobials. Bacteriocins have been proposed as potential alternatives for the treatment of infections due to multiresistant strains. To analyse the activity of R-pyocins against clinical isolates of Pseudomonas aeruginosa from patients with cystic fibrosis and other sources and evaluate them as a potential adjuvant or alternative to the current antibiotic treatment. The activity of R-pyocins against 150 strains of P. aeruginosa isolated from patients with cystic fibrosis or bacteraemia was studied through spot assay. Interactions between R-pyocins and antipseudomonal agents were quantitatively studied by the chequerboard method. The proportion of P. aeruginosa isolates susceptible to R-pyocins was found to be higher in cystic fibrosis isolates compared with bacteraemia isolates (79.41% versus 50%). Moreover, no interactions were found between common antipseudomonal agents and R-pyocin susceptibility, except for the ST175 high-risk clone. Our results highlight the possibility of using R-pyocins as therapeutic agents, alone or as adjuvants, against P. aeruginosa in cystic fibrosis. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 2 | 22% |
| United Kingdom | 2 | 22% |
| Unknown | 5 | 56% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 7 | 78% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 11% |
| Scientists | 1 | 11% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 46 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 46 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 7 | 15% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 4 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 7% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 7% |
| Other | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 7 | 15% |
| Unknown | 20 | 43% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 6 | 13% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 5 | 11% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 4 | 9% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 3 | 7% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 3 | 7% |
| Other | 2 | 4% |
| Unknown | 23 | 50% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 11 February 2019.
All research outputs
#6,231,976
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy (JAC)
#2,540
of 8,174 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#98,392
of 340,712 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy (JAC)
#46
of 124 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,174 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% 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 340,712 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 71% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 124 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 62% of its contemporaries.