↓ Skip to main content

Toxinotyping and Sequencing of Clostridium difficile Isolates from Patients in a Tertiary Care Hospital of Northern India

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Medicine, March 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
11 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
Toxinotyping and Sequencing of Clostridium difficile Isolates from Patients in a Tertiary Care Hospital of Northern India
Published in
Frontiers in Medicine, March 2017
DOI 10.3389/fmed.2017.00033
Pubmed ID
Authors

Meenakshi Singh, Chetana Vaishnavi, Safrun Mahmood, Rakesh Kochhar

Abstract

Clostridium difficile is an important cause of infectious colitis among hospitalized patients across the globe. The pathogenic potential of C. difficile in producing significant morbidity and mortality is mainly due to production of toxins A and B. The outbreaks of C. difficile infection (CDI) are due to changes in the genetic sequences of the organism. There is hardly any molecular study reported on the prevalent types of C. difficile strains in India. Toxinotyping and sequencing of locally circulating C. difficile isolates from patients presenting to our tertiary care center of North India were done. C. difficile strains (n = 174) isolated from 1,110 fecal samples from patients with suspected CDI were subjected to toxinotyping and partial sequencing of tcdA and tcdB genes. Comparison of nucleotide sequences with reference C. difficile 630 strain using BLAST was made and translated into corresponding amino acid sequences by ExPASy. Of 174 C. difficile isolates, 121 were toxigenic, belonging to toxinotype 0 (n = 76) and VIII (n = 45). Partial sequencing of toxin genes using bioinformatics approaches revealed changes in toxin A sequences of five (50%) C. difficile isolates, but the translated nucleotide sequences showed substitution in only three of them. No variation was seen in the toxin B nucleotide sequences. Interstrain variations were found in the clinical C. difficile isolates in our region. PCR amplified toxigenic genes followed by sequencing can help to identify genetic changes and pathogenicity of varied collection of C. difficile isolates.

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 11 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 11 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Professor > Associate Professor 2 18%
Researcher 2 18%
Professor 1 9%
Student > Bachelor 1 9%
Student > Master 1 9%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 4 36%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Immunology and Microbiology 3 27%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 9%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 9%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 9%
Physics and Astronomy 1 9%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 4 36%
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 28 March 2017.
All research outputs
#18,539,663
of 22,961,203 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Medicine
#3,962
of 5,726 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#234,629
of 308,511 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Medicine
#32
of 43 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,961,203 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,726 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.1. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% 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 308,511 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 43 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.