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 |
Comparative bactericidal activity of four fluoroquinolones against Pseudomonas aeruginosa isolated from chronic suppurative otitis media
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Ear, Nose and Throat Disorders, October 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12901-015-0018-9 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Katsuhisa Ikeda, Shigeki Misawa, Takeshi Kusunoki |
| Abstract |
The aim of the present study was to evaluate the bactericidal activity of four new fluoroquinolones against current isolates of Pseudomonas aeruginosa from the patients with chronic suppurative otitis media (CSOM). We examined bactericidal activity of four types of fluoroquinolones, garenoxacin (GRNX), levofloxacin (LVFX), ciprofloxacin (CPFX) and sitafloxacin (STFX) against current isolates of P. aeruginosa (50 strains). STFX exhibited the most potent activity of both MIC50 and MIC90, followed by CPFX, LVFX, and GRNX. The number of GRNX-resistant strains was significantly greater than those of LVFX, CPFX, and STFX (P < 0.05). STFX showed the most potent activity against P. aeruginosa for recent pathogens recovered from CSOM as compared with the others, suggesting that the clinical application of topical STFX would be useful to prevent the emergence of resistant mutants of P. aeruginosa. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 14 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 14 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 21% |
| Other | 2 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 14% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 2 | 14% |
| Student > Master | 1 | 7% |
| Other | 1 | 7% |
| Unknown | 3 | 21% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 5 | 36% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 21% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 2 | 14% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 1 | 7% |
| Unknown | 3 | 21% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 June 2016.
All research outputs
#2,943,607
of 22,830,751 outputs
Outputs from BMC Ear, Nose and Throat Disorders
#8
of 82 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#42,655
of 279,403 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Ear, Nose and Throat Disorders
#1
of 2 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,830,751 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 86th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 82 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.3. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% 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 279,403 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 84% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 2 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them