↓ Skip to main content

Identification of bacterial contaminants in polyherbal medicines used for the treatment of tuberculosis in Amatole District of the Eastern Cape Province, South Africa, using rapid 16S rRNA technique

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Health, Population and Nutrition, August 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
17 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
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.
Title
Identification of bacterial contaminants in polyherbal medicines used for the treatment of tuberculosis in Amatole District of the Eastern Cape Province, South Africa, using rapid 16S rRNA technique
Published in
Journal of Health, Population and Nutrition, August 2016
DOI 10.1186/s41043-016-0064-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Elizabeth Bosede Famewo, Anna Maria Clarke, Anthony Jide Afolayan

Abstract

Polyherbal medicines are used for the treatment of many diseases in many African and Asian communities. With the increasing use of these remedies, several investigations have shown that they are associated with a broad variety of residues and contaminants. This study investigates the presence of bacteria in the polyherbal medicines used for the treatment of tuberculosis (TB) in the Eastern Cape Province of South Africa. Bacterial DNA was extracted from the polyherbal medicines, and a fragment of the bacterial 16S rRNA gene was amplified by PCR with universal primers 27F and 518R. The amplicons were visualised on agarose gel electrophoresis, followed by end repair and adaptor ligation. They were further purified and quantified using Library Preparation kit NEBNext® UltraT DNA Library Prep Kit for Illumina, and the amplicons were run on illumina's MiSeq platform. Different bacterial species were identified in all each of the polyherbal medicines. Generally, the most prominent and common bacteria recovered from all the samples were Bacillus sp., Enterobacter sp., Klebsiella sp., Rahnella sp., Paenibacillus sp., Clostridium sp. and Pantoea sp. Others are Pseudomonas sp., Raoultella ornithinolytica, Salmonella enterica and Eubacterium moniliforme. This study, thus, revealed the presence of pathogenic and non-pathogenic bacteria in the polyherbal medicines used for the treatment of tuberculosis in the study area. The implications of the findings are discussed in relation to the health care of the patients of tuberculosis in the study area, having in mind that they are immunocompromised individuals.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 54 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 8 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 13%
Student > Master 6 11%
Student > Bachelor 6 11%
Other 3 6%
Other 13 24%
Unknown 11 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 10 19%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 13%
Immunology and Microbiology 6 11%
Medicine and Dentistry 6 11%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 9%
Other 8 15%
Unknown 12 22%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 27 August 2016.
All research outputs
#15,740,207
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Health, Population and Nutrition
#347
of 622 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#205,544
of 355,248 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Health, Population and Nutrition
#7
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 622 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.1. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% 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 355,248 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 9 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 2 of them.