↓ Skip to main content

Infection control knowledge, beliefs and behaviours amongst cystic fibrosis patients with epidemic Pseudomonas aeruginosa

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Pulmonary Medicine, November 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (56th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
7 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
55 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
Infection control knowledge, beliefs and behaviours amongst cystic fibrosis patients with epidemic Pseudomonas aeruginosa
Published in
BMC Pulmonary Medicine, November 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12890-015-0116-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

R. Somayaji, B. Waddell, M. L. Workentine, M. G. Surette, N. P. Brager, H. R. Rabin, M. D. Parkins

Abstract

Epidemic P. aeruginosa (ePA) infections are common in cystic fibrosis (CF) and have been associated with accelerated clinical decline. Factors associated with ePA are unclear, and evidence based infection control interventions are lacking. We prospectively collect all bacterial pathogens from adult CF patients. We performed PA strain typing on retrospectively collected enrolment samples and recent isolates to identify patients infected with ePA. All patients attending our clinic were approached to complete a survey on infection control knowledge, beliefs and exposures. We analyzed responses of those with ePA relative to the entire cohort without ePA as well as those infected with unique strains of P. aeruginosa to assess for risk factors for ePA and differences in infection control knowledge, beliefs or behaviours. Of 144 participants, 30 patients had ePA (two Liverpool epidemic strain, 28 Prairie epidemic strain), 83 % of which had established infection prior to transition to the adult clinic. Risk of concomitant infecting pathogens was no different between groups although, Staphylococcus aureus and non-tuberculous mycobacteria were less common in those with ePA. Patients with ePA were more likely to have attended CF-camp and have a history of CF fundraising. Patients with ePA did not differ with respect to beliefs regarding pathogens or transmission risk, except they believed indirect contact posed little risk. Furthermore, patients with ePA were more likely to continue to associate with others with CF despite extensive counselling. Use of peer-peer online networking was minimal in both groups. Infections with ePA are closely linked to past exposures, now routinely discouraged. As socialization is the greatest risk factor for ePA, infection control strategies for ePA must focus on discouraging face-to-face interactions amongst CF patients. As peer support remains a desire amongst patients, investment in technologies and strategies that enable indirect communication and support are required.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 2%
Canada 1 2%
Unknown 53 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 8 15%
Researcher 7 13%
Student > Master 7 13%
Other 3 5%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 5%
Other 7 13%
Unknown 20 36%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 8 15%
Social Sciences 8 15%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 11%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 4%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 4%
Other 8 15%
Unknown 21 38%
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 21 June 2018.
All research outputs
#14,023,704
of 23,749,054 outputs
Outputs from BMC Pulmonary Medicine
#818
of 2,022 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#138,103
of 287,005 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Pulmonary Medicine
#21
of 48 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,749,054 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,022 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 57% 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 287,005 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 48 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 56% of its contemporaries.