| Title |
Correcting for batch effects in case-control microbiome studies
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
PLoS Computational Biology, April 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1006102 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Sean M. Gibbons, Claire Duvallet, Eric J. Alm |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 109 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 States | 46 | 42% |
| Canada | 5 | 5% |
| United Kingdom | 5 | 5% |
| France | 4 | 4% |
| Germany | 3 | 3% |
| Japan | 3 | 3% |
| India | 2 | 2% |
| China | 2 | 2% |
| Spain | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 13 | 12% |
| Unknown | 24 | 22% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 61 | 56% |
| Members of the public | 45 | 41% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | <1% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 1 | <1% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 275 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 275 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 68 | 25% |
| Researcher | 59 | 21% |
| Student > Master | 40 | 15% |
| Student > Bachelor | 17 | 6% |
| Other | 9 | 3% |
| Other | 27 | 10% |
| Unknown | 55 | 20% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 77 | 28% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 49 | 18% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 19 | 7% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 16 | 6% |
| Computer Science | 13 | 5% |
| Other | 39 | 14% |
| Unknown | 62 | 23% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 60. 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 September 2021.
All research outputs
#719,678
of 26,017,215 outputs
Outputs from PLoS Computational Biology
#515
of 9,035 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#15,924
of 343,544 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLoS Computational Biology
#8
of 156 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 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 9,035 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% 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 343,544 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 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 156 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.