↓ Skip to main content

Increasing nontuberculous mycobacteria reporting rates and species diversity identified in clinical laboratory reports

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Infectious Diseases, April 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Readers on

mendeley
78 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
Increasing nontuberculous mycobacteria reporting rates and species diversity identified in clinical laboratory reports
Published in
BMC Infectious Diseases, April 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12879-018-3043-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Maura J. Donohue

Abstract

Nontuberculous Mycobacteria (NTM) are environmental microorganisms that can affect human health. A 2009-2010 occurrence survey of NTM in potable tap water samples indicated an increased recovery rate for many clinically significant species such as M. avium (30%) and M. abscessus (12%). To determine if these trends by species were mirrored in human infections, isolation rates of NTM species identified in clinical laboratory reports from four states were evaluated. Clinical laboratory reports from the Mississippi, Missouri, Ohio, and Wisconsin Health Departments were used to investigate the species of NTM isolated from human specimens in 2014. The NTM positive specimen reports were tabulated for each species and complex/group. The number of reports by month were used to investigate seasonal trends. The 2014 isolation rates were compared to historic values to examine longitudinal trends. The positive rate of NTM specimens increased from 8.2 per 100,000 persons in 1994 to 16 per 100,000 persons in 2014 (or 13.3 per 100,000 after excluding Mycobacterium gordonae). Changes in NTM diversity were observed in complex/groups known to be clinically significant. Between 1994 and 2014 the rate implicating M. abscesses-chelonae group and M. avium complex increased by 322 and 149%, respectively. Based on public health data supplied by the four State's Health Departments and the 2014 U.S. population, 50,976 positive NTM specimen reports per year were projected for the nation; serving as an indicator for the national potential disease burden that year.

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 78 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 78 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 13 17%
Student > Master 11 14%
Student > Postgraduate 10 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 9%
Other 11 14%
Unknown 18 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 22 28%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 13 17%
Immunology and Microbiology 8 10%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 8%
Engineering 2 3%
Other 4 5%
Unknown 23 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 16 April 2018.
All research outputs
#18,603,172
of 23,043,346 outputs
Outputs from BMC Infectious Diseases
#5,660
of 7,729 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#255,537
of 329,244 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Infectious Diseases
#96
of 141 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,043,346 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,729 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.3. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 329,244 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 141 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.