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 |
Raoultella planticola bacteremia-induced fatal septic shock following burn injury
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Annals of Clinical Microbiology and Antimicrobials, May 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12941-018-0270-0 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Tetsuya Yumoto, Hiromichi Naito, Hiromi Ihoriya, Kohei Tsukahara, Tomoyuki Ota, Toshiyuki Watanabe, Atsunori Nakao |
| Abstract |
Raoultella planticola, a Gram-negative, aerobic bacillus commonly isolated from soil and water, rarely causes invasive infections in humans. Septic shock from R. planticola after burn injury has not been previously reported. A 79-year-old male was admitted to the emergency intensive care unit after extensive flame burn injury. He accidently caught fire while burning trash and plunged into a nearby tank filled with contaminated rainwater to extinguish the fire. The patient developed septic shock on day 10. The blood culture detected R. planticola, which was identified using the VITEK-2 biochemical identification system. Although appropriate antibiotic treatment was continued, the patient died on day 12. Clinicians should be aware of fatal infections in patients with burn injury complicated by exposure to contaminated water. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 30 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 30 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Lecturer | 3 | 10% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 10% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 10% |
| Professor | 2 | 7% |
| Other | 7 | 23% |
| Unknown | 9 | 30% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 10 | 33% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 3 | 10% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 10% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 2 | 7% |
| Social Sciences | 2 | 7% |
| Other | 2 | 7% |
| Unknown | 8 | 27% |
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 07 May 2018.
All research outputs
#20,485,225
of 23,047,237 outputs
Outputs from Annals of Clinical Microbiology and Antimicrobials
#537
of 611 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#287,614
of 326,669 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Annals of Clinical Microbiology and Antimicrobials
#11
of 17 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,047,237 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 611 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.7. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 326,669 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 17 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.