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 |
Population structure and antimicrobial susceptibility of Pseudomonas aeruginosa from animal infections in France
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Veterinary Research, January 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12917-015-0324-x |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Marisa Haenni, Didier Hocquet, Cécile Ponsin, Pascal Cholley, Christophe Guyeux, Jean-Yves Madec, Xavier Bertrand |
| Abstract |
Background Pseudomonas aeruginosa is a major human pathogen, which also affects animals. It is thought that P. aeruginosa has a non-clonal epidemic population structure, with distinct isolates found in humans, animals or the environment. However, very little is known about the structure of the P. aeruginosa population from diseased animals. Data on antimicrobial resistance are also scarce.ResultsThirty-four already registered and 19 new MLST profiles were identified. Interestingly, a few clones were more prevalent, and clones associated to human outbreaks were also detected. Multidrug resistance phenotypes were overall rare.ConclusionWe highlight the non clonal structure of the population and show a higher prevalence of specific clones, possibly correlating with higher pathogenicity. The low proportion of antimicrobial resistance contrasts with the high resistance rate of human isolates. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Colombia | 1 | 10% |
| Spain | 1 | 10% |
| United States | 1 | 10% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 10% |
| Canada | 1 | 10% |
| Unknown | 5 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 8 | 80% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 20% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 86 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Estonia | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 85 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 14 | 16% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 12 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 11 | 13% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 7 | 8% |
| Researcher | 6 | 7% |
| Other | 12 | 14% |
| Unknown | 24 | 28% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 16 | 19% |
| Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine | 11 | 13% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 10 | 12% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 8 | 9% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 7 | 8% |
| Other | 8 | 9% |
| Unknown | 26 | 30% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 24 January 2016.
All research outputs
#6,443,957
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from BMC Veterinary Research
#418
of 3,298 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#79,706
of 359,552 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Veterinary Research
#8
of 60 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 74th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,298 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% 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 359,552 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 77% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 60 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.