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 |
ICTV Virus Taxonomy Profile: Rhabdoviridae
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of General Virology, February 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1099/jgv.0.001020 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Peter J. Walker, Kim R. Blasdell, Charles H. Calisher, Ralf G. Dietzgen, Hideki Kondo, Gael Kurath, Ben Longdon, David M. Stone, Robert B. Tesh, Noël Tordo, Nikos Vasilakis, Anna E. Whitfield, ICTV Report Consortium |
| Abstract |
The family Rhabdoviridae comprises viruses with negative-sense (-) single-stranded RNA genomes of 10.8-16.1 kb. Virions are typically enveloped with bullet-shaped or bacilliform morphology but can also be non-enveloped filaments. Rhabdoviruses infect plants and animals including mammals, birds, reptiles and fish, as well as arthropods which serve as single hosts or act as biological vectors for transmission to animals or plants. Rhabdoviruses include important pathogens of humans, livestock, fish and agricultural crops. This is a summary of the International Committee on Taxonomy of Viruses (ICTV) Report on the taxonomy of Rhabdoviridae, which is available at www.ictv.global/report/rhabdoviridae. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 15 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 | 5 | 33% |
| Germany | 1 | 7% |
| Ecuador | 1 | 7% |
| France | 1 | 7% |
| Unknown | 7 | 47% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 8 | 53% |
| Scientists | 6 | 40% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 7% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 124 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 124 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 21 | 17% |
| Student > Bachelor | 17 | 14% |
| Researcher | 13 | 10% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 12 | 10% |
| Other | 8 | 6% |
| Other | 24 | 19% |
| Unknown | 29 | 23% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 27 | 22% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 23 | 19% |
| Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine | 12 | 10% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 11 | 9% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 7 | 6% |
| Other | 7 | 6% |
| Unknown | 37 | 30% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 18. 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 17 April 2023.
All research outputs
#2,060,834
of 26,017,215 outputs
Outputs from Journal of General Virology
#178
of 6,722 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#42,978
of 347,593 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of General Virology
#3
of 43 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,017,215 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,722 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% 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 347,593 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 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 43 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 93% of its contemporaries.