↓ Skip to main content

Screening and contact precautions – A survey on infection control measures for multidrug-resistant bacteria in German university hospitals

Overview of attention for article published in Antimicrobial Resistance & Infection Control, April 2017
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 (80th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
14 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
22 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
Screening and contact precautions – A survey on infection control measures for multidrug-resistant bacteria in German university hospitals
Published in
Antimicrobial Resistance & Infection Control, April 2017
DOI 10.1186/s13756-017-0191-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lena M. Biehl, Hartmut Bertz, Johannes Bogner, Ute-Helke Dobermann, Johanna Kessel, Carolin Krämer, Sebastian Lemmen, Marie von Lilienfeld-Toal, Silke Peter, Mathias W. Pletz, Holger Rohde, Stefan Schmiedel, Sören Schubert, Andrew J. Ullmann, Gerd Fätkenheuer, Maria J. G. T. Vehreschild

Abstract

To assess the scope of infection control measures for multidrug-resistant bacteria in high-risk settings, a survey among university hospitals was conducted. Fourteen professionals from 8 sites participated. Reported policies varied largely with respect to the types of wards conducting screening, sample types used for screening and implementation of contact precautions. This variability among sites highlights the need for an evidence-based consensus of current infection control policies.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 14 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 22 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 22 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 5 23%
Other 2 9%
Lecturer 2 9%
Professor 2 9%
Student > Bachelor 1 5%
Other 2 9%
Unknown 8 36%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 7 32%
Immunology and Microbiology 3 14%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 9%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 5%
Unknown 9 41%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 20 July 2023.
All research outputs
#3,436,335
of 24,792,566 outputs
Outputs from Antimicrobial Resistance & Infection Control
#467
of 1,407 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#60,422
of 314,997 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Antimicrobial Resistance & Infection Control
#15
of 24 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,792,566 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 86th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,407 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% 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 314,997 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 80% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 24 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.