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 |
Discovery and validation of a prognostic proteomic signature for tuberculosis progression: A prospective cohort study
|
---|---|
Published in |
PLOS Medicine, April 2019
|
DOI | 10.1371/journal.pmed.1002781 |
Pubmed ID | |
Authors |
Adam Penn-Nicholson, Thomas Hraha, Ethan G. Thompson, David Sterling, Stanley Kimbung Mbandi, Kirsten M. Wall, Michelle Fisher, Sara Suliman, Smitha Shankar, Willem A. Hanekom, Nebojsa Janjic, Mark Hatherill, Stefan H. E. Kaufmann, Jayne Sutherland, Gerhard Walzl, Mary Ann De Groote, Urs Ochsner, Daniel E. Zak, Thomas J. Scriba |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 41 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
South Africa | 7 | 17% |
United Kingdom | 5 | 12% |
United States | 4 | 10% |
North Macedonia | 1 | 2% |
Denmark | 1 | 2% |
Australia | 1 | 2% |
Uganda | 1 | 2% |
Egypt | 1 | 2% |
Malaysia | 1 | 2% |
Other | 4 | 10% |
Unknown | 15 | 37% |
Demographic breakdown
Type | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Members of the public | 23 | 56% |
Scientists | 15 | 37% |
Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 2 | 5% |
Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 2% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 145 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Unknown | 145 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Researcher | 29 | 20% |
Student > Master | 18 | 12% |
Student > Ph. D. Student | 16 | 11% |
Student > Bachelor | 10 | 7% |
Student > Doctoral Student | 7 | 5% |
Other | 23 | 16% |
Unknown | 42 | 29% |
Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Medicine and Dentistry | 28 | 19% |
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 12 | 8% |
Immunology and Microbiology | 12 | 8% |
Nursing and Health Professions | 11 | 8% |
Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 9 | 6% |
Other | 22 | 15% |
Unknown | 51 | 35% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 42. 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 28 November 2019.
All research outputs
#989,912
of 25,385,509 outputs
Outputs from PLOS Medicine
#1,499
of 5,161 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#21,847
of 347,757 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS Medicine
#18
of 58 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,385,509 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 5,161 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 77.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% 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 347,757 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 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 58 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 68% of its contemporaries.