↓ Skip to main content

Factors affecting use of ballistics gelatin in laboratory studies of bacterial contamination in projectile wounds

Overview of attention for article published in Military Medical Research, May 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
1 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
16 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
Factors affecting use of ballistics gelatin in laboratory studies of bacterial contamination in projectile wounds
Published in
Military Medical Research, May 2018
DOI 10.1186/s40779-018-0164-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jessica J. Evans, Aaron Bost, Karim H. Muci-Küchler, Linda C. DeVeaux

Abstract

Ballistics gelatin is a common tissue surrogate used in bacterial contamination models for projectile wounds. Although these studies have demonstrated that bacteria are transferred from the surface of the gelatin to the wound track by a projectile, quantifiable results have been inconsistent and not repeatable in successive tests. In this study, five areas of a typical contamination model in which bacterial recovery or survival are affected were identified for optimization. The first was a contaminated "skin" surrogate, where the novel use of vacuum filtration of a bacterial culture and buffer onto filter paper was employed. The other possibly problematic areas of the bacterial distribution model included the determination of bacterial survival when the contamination model is dried, survival in solid and molten gelatin, and the effect of high-intensity lights used for recording high-speed video. Vacuum filtration of bacteria and buffer resulted in a consistent bacterial distribution and recovery. The use of phosphate buffer M9 (pH 7) aided in neutralizing the ballistics gelatin and improving bacterial survival in solid gelatin. Additionally, the use of high-intensity lights to record high-speed video and the use of a 42°C water bath to melt the gelatin were found to be bactericidal for gram-positive and gram-negative bacteria. Multiple areas of a typical contamination model in which bacterial survival may be impeded were identified, and methods were proposed to improve survival in each area. These methods may be used to optimize the results of bacterial contamination models for medical applications, such as understanding the progression of infection in penetrating wounds and to identify possible sources of contamination for forensic purposes.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 16 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 25%
Student > Master 2 13%
Professor 1 6%
Unknown 9 56%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 1 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 6%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 6%
Sports and Recreations 1 6%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 6%
Other 2 13%
Unknown 9 56%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 01 June 2018.
All research outputs
#16,728,456
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Military Medical Research
#257
of 443 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#211,476
of 344,607 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Military Medical Research
#8
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 443 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.9. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% 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 344,607 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 11 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.