↓ Skip to main content

Tracing the emergence of multidrug-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii in a Taiwanese hospital by evaluating the presence of integron gene intI1

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Negative Results in BioMedicine, August 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#20 of 112)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (85th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
2 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
14 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
Tracing the emergence of multidrug-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii in a Taiwanese hospital by evaluating the presence of integron gene intI1
Published in
Journal of Negative Results in BioMedicine, August 2014
DOI 10.1186/1477-5751-13-15
Pubmed ID
Authors

Chang-Hua Chen, Chieh-Chen Huang

Abstract

In Changhua County, Taiwan, the number of clinical Acinetobacter baumannii isolates has risen since 2002, and multidrug-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii (MDRAB) has spread rapidly throughout Taiwan. In this study, to reveal the mechanism involved with the rapid dissemination of MDRAB emergence, the utility of the class 1 integron, intI1 integrase gene, as an MDRAB-associated biomarker was examined. A cross-sectional, clinical epidemiological study was performed at Changhua Christian Hospital between January 1st, 2001 and December 31st, 2004. Besides the existence of intI1 gene was examined, the pulse-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE) was also performed to determine the epidemiological characteristics of the isolates.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 14 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 14 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 14%
Researcher 2 14%
Other 1 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 7%
Professor 1 7%
Other 3 21%
Unknown 4 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 6 43%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 7%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 1 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 7%
Chemistry 1 7%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 4 29%
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 10 April 2015.
All research outputs
#3,058,710
of 22,760,687 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Negative Results in BioMedicine
#20
of 112 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#32,291
of 231,195 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Negative Results in BioMedicine
#1
of 4 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,760,687 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 112 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% 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 231,195 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 85% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them