| Title |
Ecological effects of cefepime use during antibiotic cycling on the Gram-negative enteric flora of ICU patients
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Intensive Care Medicine Experimental, July 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s40635-018-0185-2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Carola Venturini, Andrew N. Ginn, Brooke E. Wilson, Guy Tsafnat, Ian Paulsen, Sally R. Partridge, Jonathan R. Iredell |
| Abstract |
This study examines the impact of cefepime and APP-β (antipseudomonal penicillin/ β-lactamase inhibitor combinations) on Gram-negative bacterial colonization and resistance in two Australian ICUs. While resistance did not cumulatively increase, cefepime (but not APP-β treatment) was associated with acquisition of antibiotic resistant Enterobacteriaceae, consistent with an ecological effect. Analysis of the resident gut E. coli population in a subset of patients showed an increase in markers of horizontal gene transfer after cefepime exposure that helps explain the increase in APP-β resistance and reminds us that unmeasured impacts on the microbiome are key outcome determinants that need to be fully explored. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 19 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 19 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 16% |
| Researcher | 2 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 11% |
| Other | 1 | 5% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 2 | 11% |
| Unknown | 8 | 42% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 11% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 2 | 11% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 5% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 5% |
| Environmental Science | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 12 | 63% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 July 2018.
All research outputs
#4,048,080
of 23,098,660 outputs
Outputs from Intensive Care Medicine Experimental
#99
of 452 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#77,950
of 330,334 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Intensive Care Medicine Experimental
#7
of 15 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,098,660 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 82nd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 452 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% 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 330,334 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 76% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 15 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 53% of its contemporaries.