| Title |
Antibiotic therapy and Clostridium difficile infection – primum non nocere – first do no harm
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Infection and Drug Resistance, September 2015
|
| DOI | 10.2147/idr.s87224 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Grace S Crowther, Mark H Wilcox |
| Abstract |
Treatment options for Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) remain limited despite this usually nosocomial infection posing an urgent threat to public health. A major paradox of the management of CDI is the use of antimicrobial agents to treat infection, which runs the risk of prolonged gut microbiota perturbation and so recurrence of infection. Here, we explore alternative CDI treatment and prevention options currently available or in development. Notably, strategies that aim to reduce the negative effects of antibiotics on gut microbiota offer the potential to alter current antimicrobial stewardship approaches to preventing CDI. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 12 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 States | 4 | 33% |
| Canada | 1 | 8% |
| Colombia | 1 | 8% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 8% |
| France | 1 | 8% |
| Unknown | 4 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 10 | 83% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 8% |
| Scientists | 1 | 8% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 47 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 46 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 8 | 17% |
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 13% |
| Researcher | 5 | 11% |
| Student > Master | 5 | 11% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 4 | 9% |
| Other | 6 | 13% |
| Unknown | 13 | 28% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 10 | 21% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 6 | 13% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 5 | 11% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 5 | 11% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 5 | 11% |
| Unknown | 14 | 30% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 23. 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 30 November 2021.
All research outputs
#1,410,011
of 22,829,083 outputs
Outputs from Infection and Drug Resistance
#45
of 1,653 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#20,472
of 266,859 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Infection and Drug Resistance
#3
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,829,083 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,653 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% 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 266,859 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 11 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 72% of its contemporaries.