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 |
Risk perception of antimicrobial resistance by infection control specialists in Europe: a case-vignette study
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Antimicrobial Resistance & Infection Control, February 2020
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13756-020-0695-z |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Gabriel Birgand, Nico T. Mutters, Raheelah Ahmad, Evelina Tacconelli, Jean-Christophe Lucet, Alison Holmes |
| Abstract |
Using case-vignettes, we assessed the perception of European infection control (IC) specialists regarding the individual and collective risk associated with antimicrobial resistance (AMR) among inpatients. In this study, sixteen case-vignettes were developed to simulate hospitalised patient scenarios in the field of AMR and IC. A total of 245 IC specialists working in different hospitals from 15 European countries were contacted, among which 149 agreed to participate in the study. Using an online database, each participant scored five randomly-assigned case-vignettes, regarding the perceived risk associated with six different multidrug resistant organisms (MDRO). The intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC), varying from 0 (poor) to 1 (perfect), was used to assess the agreement for the risk on a 7-point Likert scale. High risk and low/neutral risk scorers were compared regarding their national, organisational and individual characteristics. Between January and May 2017, 149 participants scored 655 case-vignettes. The perceptions of the individual (clinical outcome) and collective (spread) risks were consistently lower than other MDRO for extended spectrum beta-lactamase producing Enterobacteriaceae cases and higher for carbapenemase producing Enterobacteriaceae (CPE) cases. Regarding CPE cases, answers were influenced more by the resistance pattern (93%) than for other MDRO. The risk associated with vancomycin resistant Enterococci cases was considered higher for the collective impact than for the individual outcome (63% vs 40%). The intra-country agreement regarding the individual risk was globally poor varying from 0.00 (ICC: 0-0.25) to 0.51 (0.18-0.85). The overall agreement across countries was poor at 0.20 (0.07-0.33). IC specialists working in hospitals preserved from MDROs perceived a higher individual (local, p = 0.01; national, p < 0.01) and collective risk (local and national p < 0.01) than those frequently exposed to bacteraemia. Conversely, IC specialists working in hospitals with a high MDRO clinical burden had a decreased risk perception. The perception of the risk associated with AMR varied greatly across IC specialists and countries, relying on contextual factors including the epidemiology. IC specialists working in high prevalence areas may underestimate both the individual and collective risks, and might further negatively promote the MDRO spread. These finding highlight the need to shape local and national control strategies according to risk perceptions and contextual factors. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 31 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 4 | 13% |
| France | 3 | 10% |
| Switzerland | 2 | 6% |
| South Africa | 2 | 6% |
| Spain | 2 | 6% |
| Egypt | 1 | 3% |
| Finland | 1 | 3% |
| Canada | 1 | 3% |
| Portugal | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 14 | 45% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 17 | 55% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 6 | 19% |
| Scientists | 4 | 13% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 4 | 13% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 56 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 56 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 11 | 20% |
| Student > Master | 8 | 14% |
| Other | 4 | 7% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 7% |
| Lecturer > Senior Lecturer | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 8 | 14% |
| Unknown | 18 | 32% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 15 | 27% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 4 | 7% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 3 | 5% |
| Psychology | 2 | 4% |
| Arts and Humanities | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 9 | 16% |
| Unknown | 21 | 38% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 27. 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 31 December 2020.
All research outputs
#1,444,680
of 25,377,790 outputs
Outputs from Antimicrobial Resistance & Infection Control
#130
of 1,456 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#37,499
of 477,961 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Antimicrobial Resistance & Infection Control
#6
of 46 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,377,790 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,456 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% 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 477,961 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 46 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.