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 |
Prevalence of Mycobacterium lentiflavum in cystic fibrosis patients, France
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Pulmonary Medicine, October 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12890-015-0123-y |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Michael Phelippeau, Jean-Christophe Dubus, Martine Reynaud-Gaubert, Carine Gomez, Nathalie Stremler le Bel, Marielle Bedotto, Elsa Prudent, Michel Drancourt |
| Abstract |
Mycobacterium lentiflavum is rarely isolated in respiratory tract samples from cystic fibrosis patients. We herein describe an unusually high prevalence of M. lentiflavum in such patients. M. lentiflavum, isolated from the respiratory tract of cystic fibrosis patients, was identified using both rpoB partial sequencing and detected directly in the sputum by using real-time PCR targeting the smpB gene. M. lentiflavum emerged as the third most prevalent nontuberculous mycobacterial species isolated in cystic fibrosis patients in Marseille, France. Six such patients were all male, and two of them may have fulfilled the American Thoracic Society clinical and microbiological criteria for M. lentiflavum potential lung infection. M. lentiflavum was the third most common mycobacteria isolated in cystic fibrosis patients, particularly in six male patients. M. lentiflavum outbreaks are emerging particularly in cystic fibrosis patients. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| France | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 15 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 15 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 4 | 27% |
| Researcher | 4 | 27% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 1 | 7% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 1 | 7% |
| Other | 1 | 7% |
| Unknown | 2 | 13% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 6 | 40% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 13% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 13% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 7% |
| Social Sciences | 1 | 7% |
| Other | 1 | 7% |
| Unknown | 2 | 13% |
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 04 December 2015.
All research outputs
#18,429,829
of 22,831,537 outputs
Outputs from BMC Pulmonary Medicine
#1,380
of 1,917 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#204,666
of 284,375 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Pulmonary Medicine
#34
of 50 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,831,537 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 1,917 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.4. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% 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 284,375 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 50 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.