| Title |
Assessing the reliability of eBURST using simulated populations with known ancestry
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Microbiology, April 2007
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1471-2180-7-30 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Katherine ME Turner, William P Hanage, Christophe Fraser, Thomas R Connor, Brian G Spratt |
| Abstract |
The program eBURST uses multilocus sequence typing data to divide bacterial populations into groups of closely related strains (clonal complexes), predicts the founding genotype of each group, and displays the patterns of recent evolutionary descent of all other strains in the group from the founder. The reliability of eBURST was evaluated using populations simulated with different levels of recombination in which the ancestry of all strains was known. |
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 Kingdom | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 50% |
| Scientists | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 114 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 4 | 4% |
| United Kingdom | 2 | 2% |
| Spain | 1 | <1% |
| Portugal | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 106 | 93% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 30 | 26% |
| Researcher | 30 | 26% |
| Student > Master | 13 | 11% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 8 | 7% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 4% |
| Other | 19 | 17% |
| Unknown | 10 | 9% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 55 | 48% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 14 | 12% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 13 | 11% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 7 | 6% |
| Computer Science | 4 | 4% |
| Other | 7 | 6% |
| Unknown | 14 | 12% |
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 31 March 2016.
All research outputs
#15,395,177
of 25,711,518 outputs
Outputs from BMC Microbiology
#1,394
of 3,514 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#77,533
of 90,288 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Microbiology
#10
of 10 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,711,518 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,514 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 58% 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 90,288 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 10 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.