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 |
Where Next for Microbiome Research?
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
PLoS Biology, January 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1371/journal.pbio.1002050 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Matthew K. Waldor, Gene Tyson, Elhanan Borenstein, Howard Ochman, Andrew Moeller, B. Brett Finlay, Heidi H. Kong, Jeffrey I. Gordon, Karen E. Nelson, Karim Dabbagh, Hamilton Smith |
| Abstract |
The development of high-throughput sequencing technologies has transformed our capacity to investigate the composition and dynamics of the microbial communities that populate diverse habitats. Over the past decade, these advances have yielded an avalanche of metagenomic data. The current stage of "van Leeuwenhoek"-like cataloguing, as well as functional analyses, will likely accelerate as DNA and RNA sequencing, plus protein and metabolic profiling capacities and computational tools, continue to improve. However, it is time to consider: what's next for microbiome research? The short pieces included here briefly consider the challenges and opportunities awaiting microbiome research. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 55 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| France | 13 | 24% |
| United States | 7 | 13% |
| Canada | 4 | 7% |
| United Kingdom | 3 | 5% |
| Spain | 3 | 5% |
| Ecuador | 1 | 2% |
| Japan | 1 | 2% |
| Portugal | 1 | 2% |
| Germany | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 6 | 11% |
| Unknown | 15 | 27% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 38 | 69% |
| Scientists | 14 | 25% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 4% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 2% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 727 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 17 | 2% |
| France | 3 | <1% |
| Canada | 3 | <1% |
| Denmark | 3 | <1% |
| Belgium | 3 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 3 | <1% |
| India | 2 | <1% |
| Spain | 2 | <1% |
| Taiwan | 2 | <1% |
| Other | 10 | 1% |
| Unknown | 679 | 93% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 172 | 24% |
| Researcher | 164 | 23% |
| Student > Master | 95 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 53 | 7% |
| Other | 39 | 5% |
| Other | 127 | 17% |
| Unknown | 77 | 11% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 303 | 42% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 103 | 14% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 50 | 7% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 50 | 7% |
| Computer Science | 24 | 3% |
| Other | 98 | 13% |
| Unknown | 99 | 14% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 45. 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 08 May 2019.
All research outputs
#928,844
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from PLoS Biology
#1,638
of 8,833 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#12,262
of 359,935 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLoS Biology
#22
of 75 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,833 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 48.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% 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 359,935 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 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 75 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 70% of its contemporaries.