↓ Skip to main content

Machine Learning Techniques Accurately Classify Microbial Communities by Bacterial Vaginosis Characteristics

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, February 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (94th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (88th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
16 X users

Readers on

mendeley
164 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
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.
Article details
Title
Machine Learning Techniques Accurately Classify Microbial Communities by Bacterial Vaginosis Characteristics
Published in
PLOS ONE, February 2014
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0087830
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Microbial communities are important to human health. Bacterial vaginosis (BV) is a disease associated with the vagina microbiome. While the causes of BV are unknown, the microbial community in the vagina appears to play a role. We use three different machine-learning techniques to classify microbial communities into BV categories. These three techniques include genetic programming (GP), random forests (RF), and logistic regression (LR). We evaluate the classification accuracy of each of these techniques on two different datasets. We then deconstruct the classification models to identify important features of the microbial community. We found that the classification models produced by the machine learning techniques obtained accuracies above 90% for Nugent score BV and above 80% for Amsel criteria BV. While the classification models identify largely different sets of important features, the shared features often agree with past research.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 16 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 164 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
United States 2 1%
Canada 2 1%
South Africa 1 <1%
Unknown 159 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 31 19%
Researcher 30 18%
Student > Master 19 12%
Student > Bachelor 16 10%
Other 9 5%
Other 20 12%
Unknown 39 24%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 44 27%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 19 12%
Computer Science 17 10%
Immunology and Microbiology 10 6%
Medicine and Dentistry 9 5%
Other 23 14%
Unknown 42 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 21. 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 October 2021.
All research outputs
#2,286,124
of 34,361,833 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#24,843
of 224,520 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#21,946
of 374,548 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#701
of 6,112 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,361,833 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 224,520 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 17.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% 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 374,548 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 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 6,112 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.