↓ Skip to main content

Survey of diagnostic testing for respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) in adults: Infectious disease physician practices and implications for burden estimates

Overview of attention for article published in Diagnostic Microbiology & Infectious Disease, December 2017
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 (90th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (94th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
policy
1 policy source
twitter
8 X users

Readers on

mendeley
28 Mendeley
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
Survey of diagnostic testing for respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) in adults: Infectious disease physician practices and implications for burden estimates
Published in
Diagnostic Microbiology & Infectious Disease, December 2017
DOI 10.1016/j.diagmicrobio.2017.12.011
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) often causes respiratory illness in adults. Over 40 RSV vaccine and monoclonal antibody products are currently in preclinical development or clinical trials. Because RSV diagnostic practices may impact disease burden estimates, we investigated infectious disease physicians' RSV diagnostic practices among their adult patients.

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 8 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 28 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 %
Unknown 28 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 4 14%
Researcher 4 14%
Student > Bachelor 2 7%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 7%
Student > Master 2 7%
Other 1 4%
Unknown 13 46%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 3 11%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 7%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 7%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 4%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 4%
Other 2 7%
Unknown 17 61%
Attention Score in Context

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 02 March 2022.
All research outputs
#2,856,858
of 34,376,207 outputs
Outputs from Diagnostic Microbiology & Infectious Disease
#92
of 3,288 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#48,279
of 493,929 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Diagnostic Microbiology & Infectious Disease
#3
of 57 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,376,207 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 3,288 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% 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 493,929 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 57 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 94% of its contemporaries.