↓ Skip to main content

Can a toxin gene NAAT be used to predict toxin EIA and the severity of Clostridium difficile infection?

Overview of attention for article published in Antimicrobial Resistance & Infection Control, December 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 (87th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (72nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
21 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
24 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
15 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
Can a toxin gene NAAT be used to predict toxin EIA and the severity of Clostridium difficile infection?
Published in
Antimicrobial Resistance & Infection Control, December 2017
DOI 10.1186/s13756-017-0283-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mark I. Garvey, Craig W. Bradley, Martyn A. C. Wilkinson, Elisabeth Holden

Abstract

Diagnosis of C. difficile infection (CDI) is controversial because of the many laboratory methods available and their lack of ability to distinguish between carriage, mild or severe disease. Here we describe whether a low C. difficile toxin B nucleic acid amplification test (NAAT) cycle threshold (CT) can predict toxin EIA, CDI severity and mortality. A three-stage algorithm was employed for CDI testing, comprising a screening test for glutamate dehydrogenase (GDH), followed by a NAAT, then a toxin enzyme immunoassay (EIA). All diarrhoeal samples positive for GDH and NAAT between 2012 and 2016 were analysed. The performance of the NAAT CT value as a classifier of toxin EIA outcome was analysed using a ROC curve; patient mortality was compared to CTs and toxin EIA via linear regression models. A CT value ≤26 was associated with ≥72% toxin EIA positivity; applying a logistic regression model we demonstrated an association between low CT values and toxin EIA positivity. A CT value of ≤26 was significantly associated (p = 0.0262) with increased one month mortality, severe cases of CDI or failure of first line treatment. The ROC curve probabilities demonstrated a CT cut off value of 26.6. Here we demonstrate that a CT ≤26 indicates more severe CDI and is associated with higher mortality. Samples with a low CT value are often toxin EIA positive, questioning the need for this additional EIA test. A CT ≤26 could be used to assess the potential for severity of CDI and guide patient treatment.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 21 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 15 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 15 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 2 13%
Student > Postgraduate 2 13%
Researcher 2 13%
Unspecified 1 7%
Student > Bachelor 1 7%
Other 3 20%
Unknown 4 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 4 27%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 13%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 7%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 1 7%
Unspecified 1 7%
Other 1 7%
Unknown 5 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 14. 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 13 June 2018.
All research outputs
#2,440,877
of 24,003,070 outputs
Outputs from Antimicrobial Resistance & Infection Control
#306
of 1,347 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#55,926
of 447,387 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Antimicrobial Resistance & Infection Control
#11
of 40 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,003,070 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,347 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% 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 447,387 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 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 40 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its contemporaries.