↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Impact of the New Delhi metallo-beta-lactamase on beta-lactam antibiotics

Overview of attention for article published in Infection and Drug Resistance, August 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (75th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
8 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
48 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
95 Mendeley
Title
Impact of the New Delhi metallo-beta-lactamase on beta-lactam antibiotics
Published in
Infection and Drug Resistance, August 2015
DOI 10.2147/idr.s39186
Pubmed ID
Authors

Monika T Zmarlicka, Michael D Nailor, David P Nicolau

Abstract

Since the first New Delhi metallo-beta-lactamase (NDM) report in 2009, NDM has spread globally causing various types of infections. NDM-positive organisms produce in vitro resistance phenotypes to carbapenems and many other antimicrobials. It is thus surprising that the literature examining clinical experiences with NDM does not report corresponding poor clinical outcomes. There are many instances where good clinical outcomes are described, despite a mismatch between administered antimicrobials and resistant in vitro susceptibilities. Available in vitro data for either monotherapy or combination therapy does not provide an explanation for these observations. However, animal studies do begin to shed more light on this phenomenon. They imply that the in vivo expression of NDM may not confer clinical resistance to all cephalosporin and carbapenem antibiotics as predicted by in vitro testing but other resistance mechanisms need to be present to generate a resistant phenotype. As such, previously abandoned therapies, particularly carbapenems and beta-lactamase inhibitor combinations, may retain utility against infections caused by NDM producers.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 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 95 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 1%
India 1 1%
Estonia 1 1%
Unknown 92 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 13 14%
Other 10 11%
Student > Bachelor 10 11%
Researcher 9 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 6%
Other 20 21%
Unknown 27 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 17 18%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 13 14%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 12 13%
Immunology and Microbiology 10 11%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 5 5%
Other 10 11%
Unknown 28 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 17 March 2020.
All research outputs
#6,462,115
of 25,703,943 outputs
Outputs from Infection and Drug Resistance
#254
of 2,064 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#68,097
of 277,098 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Infection and Drug Resistance
#9
of 14 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,703,943 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 74th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,064 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% 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 277,098 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 75% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 14 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.