| Title |
Gut Microbe Analysis Between Hyperthyroid and Healthy Individuals
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Current Microbiology, June 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00284-014-0640-6 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Lei Zhou, Xinli Li, Ayaz Ahmed, Dachang Wu, Liang Liu, Juanjuan Qiu, Yao Yan, Meilan Jin, Yi Xin |
| Abstract |
Clinicians have long recognized that thyroid hormones have some effects on the gastrointestinal tract. This study aimed to investigate the gut microbiota in hyperthyroid and assess whether there are alterations in the diversity and similarity of gut microbiota in the hyperthyroid when compared with healthy individuals. PCR-denaturing gradient gel electrophoresis (DGGE) with universal primers targeting V3 region of the 16S rRNA gene was employed to characterize the overall intestinal microbiota composition, and some excised gel bands were cloned for sequencing. Enterobacteriaceae, Enterococcus, Bifidobacterium, Clostridium, and Lactobacillus genus were also enumerated by quantitative real-time PCR. A significant difference between hyperthyroid and healthy groups ((*) P < 0.05) was shown in DGGE profiles. And real-time PCR showed obvious decrease of Bifidobacterium and Lactobacillus ((*) P < 0.05), and increase of Enterococcus ((*) P < 0.05) in the hyperthyroid group. This study shows the characterization of gut microbiota in hyperthyroid. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 11 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 3 | 27% |
| Japan | 1 | 9% |
| Canada | 1 | 9% |
| United States | 1 | 9% |
| Unknown | 5 | 45% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 9 | 82% |
| Scientists | 1 | 9% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 9% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 86 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 1% |
| Australia | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 84 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 21 | 24% |
| Student > Master | 15 | 17% |
| Researcher | 11 | 13% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 5 | 6% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 5% |
| Other | 12 | 14% |
| Unknown | 18 | 21% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 22 | 26% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 13 | 15% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 8 | 9% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 6 | 7% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 5 | 6% |
| Other | 10 | 12% |
| Unknown | 22 | 26% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. 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 04 May 2021.
All research outputs
#3,038,466
of 23,849,241 outputs
Outputs from Current Microbiology
#70
of 2,513 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#30,352
of 230,930 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Current Microbiology
#2
of 32 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,849,241 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,513 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.2. 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 230,930 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 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 32 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.