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 |
A prospective study of two isothermal amplification assays compared with real-time PCR, CCNA and toxigenic culture for the diagnosis of Clostridium difficile infection
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Microbiology, February 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12866-016-0635-5 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Martina Neuendorf, Raquel Guadarrama-Gonzalez, Birgit Lamik, Colin R. MacKenzie |
| Abstract |
New molecular methods of detecting Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) provide the routine lab with a sensitive random access method to produce results that are available in a shorter time than traditional methods. In this prospective study a total of 989 stool specimens were tested over a period of 16 months in parallel using two isothermal amplification assays, AmpliVue® (Quidel) and Illumigene® (Meridian) and the results compared to those from toxigenic culture. In addition all specimens were tested using a cytotoxic cell neutralisation assay (CCNA) and three different Real-time PCR targeting a C. difficile-specific 16S rDNA sequence or the toxin genes tcdA, tcdB/tcdB027 or cdtB. AmpliVue® was positive in 242 (24.5 %) and Illumigene® in 228 (23.1 %) specimens. 167 (16.9 %) specimens were positive in toxigenic culture. Real-time-tcdA and -tcdB PCR was positive in 211 (21.3 %) specimens, Real-time-cdtB PCR was positive in 101 (10.2 %) specimens and C. difficile-PCR (16S rDNA) in 267 (27.0 %) specimens. The respective sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value compared to toxigenic culture were 91, 89, 62 and 98 % for AmpliVue® and 91, 91, 67 and 98 % for Illumigene®. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 50% |
| Scientists | 1 | 50% |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Germany | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 29 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 4 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 13% |
| Researcher | 4 | 13% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 10% |
| Professor | 2 | 7% |
| Other | 5 | 17% |
| Unknown | 8 | 27% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 7 | 23% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 5 | 17% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 3 | 10% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 7% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 7% |
| Other | 2 | 7% |
| Unknown | 9 | 30% |
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 16 February 2016.
All research outputs
#17,787,961
of 22,849,304 outputs
Outputs from BMC Microbiology
#2,008
of 3,193 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#273,357
of 400,467 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Microbiology
#37
of 53 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,849,304 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,193 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.1. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% 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 400,467 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 53 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.