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 |
Bacterial neonatal sepsis and antibiotic resistance in low-income countries
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
The Lancet, February 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1016/s0140-6736(16)00220-8 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Bich-Tram Huynh, Michael Padget, Benoit Garin, Elisabeth Delarocque-Astagneau, Didier Guillemot, Laurence Borand, Thida Chon, Agathe de Lauzanne, Sophie Goyet, Sopheak Hem, Alexandra Kerleguer, Siyin Lach, Veronique Ngo, Arnaud Tarantola, Sok Touch, Jean-Marc Collard, Perlinot Herindrainy, Patrice Piola, Bodonirina Tanjona Raheliarivao, Frédérique Randrianirina, Awa Ndir, Vincent Richard, Abdoulaye Seck, Raymond Bercion, Amy Gassama Sow, Jean Baptiste Diouf, Pape Samba Dieye, Balla Sy, Bouya Ndao, Maud Seguy, Elsa Kermorvant-Duchemin, Laurence Watier |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| France | 3 | 27% |
| United Kingdom | 2 | 18% |
| Colombia | 1 | 9% |
| Argentina | 1 | 9% |
| Spain | 1 | 9% |
| Unknown | 3 | 27% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 10 | 91% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 9% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 76 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 76 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 15 | 20% |
| Other | 11 | 14% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 7 | 9% |
| Student > Master | 7 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 5% |
| Other | 17 | 22% |
| Unknown | 15 | 20% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 36 | 47% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 4 | 5% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 3% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 2 | 3% |
| Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 7 | 9% |
| Unknown | 23 | 30% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 16. 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 13 February 2016.
All research outputs
#2,237,849
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from The Lancet
#13,396
of 42,669 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#38,382
of 406,424 outputs
Outputs of similar age from The Lancet
#216
of 479 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 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 42,669 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 67.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% 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 406,424 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 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 479 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 54% of its contemporaries.