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 |
Bacteraemia and fungaemia in cystic fibrosis patients with febrile pulmonary exacerbation: a prospective observational study
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Pulmonary Medicine, June 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12890-017-0440-4 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Joerg Grosse-Onnebrink, Florian Stehling, Eva Tschiedel, Margarete Olivier, Uwe Mellies, Rene Schmidt, Jan Buer, Peter-Micheal Rath, Joerg Steinmann |
| Abstract |
Bloodstream pathogens can be identified by multiplex PCR (SeptiFast (SF)) or blood culture (BC); whether these pathogens are present in cystic fibrosis (CF) patients during febrile pulmonary exacerbations (FPE) has not been sufficiently studied. In this prospective observational study, blood from CF patients experiencing FPE was tested with SF and BC before the initiation of antibiotic treatment. After contaminants had been excluded, 9 of 72 blood samples tested positive by BC or SF. SF exclusively detected four pathogens; BC, one. Pulmonary pathogen transmission was likely in all cases except for 2 cases of candidaemia, which were believed to be caused by catheter-related infections. For three cases, test results caused us to change the antibiotic regimen. Sensitivity (85.7% vs. 42.9%) and negative predictive value (98.4% vs. 87.0%) tended to be higher for SF than for BC. The results of SF and BC show that bacteraemia and fungaemia are present in CF patients during FPE and may affect antibiotic therapy. SF can help rule out catheter-related bloodstream infections. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 2 | 50% |
| Unknown | 2 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 75% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 38 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 38 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 7 | 18% |
| Other | 5 | 13% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 4 | 11% |
| Researcher | 4 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 3 | 8% |
| Unknown | 13 | 34% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 14 | 37% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 11% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 3 | 8% |
| Engineering | 2 | 5% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 3 | 8% |
| Unknown | 11 | 29% |
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 03 July 2017.
All research outputs
#14,102,908
of 23,881,329 outputs
Outputs from BMC Pulmonary Medicine
#824
of 2,030 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#163,407
of 317,183 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Pulmonary Medicine
#14
of 25 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,881,329 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,030 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 57% 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 317,183 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 25 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.