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 |
The Iron Distribution and Magnetic Properties of Schistosome Eggshells: Implications for Improved Diagnostics
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
PLoS Neglected Tropical Diseases, May 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1371/journal.pntd.0002219 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Stephan Karl, Lucía Gutiérrez, Rafael Lucyk-Maurer, Roland Kerr, Renata R. F. Candido, Shu Q. Toh, Martin Saunders, Jeremy A. Shaw, Alexandra Suvorova, Andreas Hofmann, Michael J. House, Robert C. Woodward, Carlos Graeff-Teixera, Timothy G. St. Pierre, Malcolm K. Jones |
| Abstract |
Schistosoma mansoni and Schistosoma japonicum are the most frequent causative agents of human intestinal schistosomiasis. Approximately 200 million people in the world are infected with schistosomes. Diagnosis of schistosomiasis is often difficult. High percentages of low level infections are missed in routine fecal smear analysis and current diagnostic methodologies are inadequate to monitor the progress of parasite control, especially in areas with low transmission. Improved diagnostic methods are urgently needed to evaluate the success of elimination programs. Recently, a magnetic fractionation method for isolation of parasite eggs from feces was described, which uses magnetic microspheres to form parasite egg - magnetic microsphere conjugates. This approach enables screening of larger sample volumes and thus increased diagnostic sensitivity. The mechanism of formation of the conjugates remains unexplained and may either be related to specific surface characteristics of eggs and microspheres or to their magnetic properties. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
| Scientists | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 36 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 36 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 10 | 28% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 8 | 22% |
| Student > Master | 5 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 6% |
| Librarian | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 3 | 8% |
| Unknown | 6 | 17% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 7 | 19% |
| Engineering | 6 | 17% |
| Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine | 3 | 8% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 8% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 8 | 22% |
| Unknown | 7 | 19% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 03 June 2013.
All research outputs
#16,737,737
of 25,394,764 outputs
Outputs from PLoS Neglected Tropical Diseases
#6,996
of 9,380 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#126,826
of 207,341 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLoS Neglected Tropical Diseases
#95
of 128 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,394,764 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 9,380 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.0. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% 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 207,341 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 128 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.