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 |
Meta-analysis of fecal metagenomes reveals global microbial signatures that are specific for colorectal cancer
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Nature Medicine, April 2019
|
| DOI | 10.1038/s41591-019-0406-6 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jakob Wirbel, Paul Theodor Pyl, Ece Kartal, Konrad Zych, Alireza Kashani, Alessio Milanese, Jonas S. Fleck, Anita Y. Voigt, Albert Palleja, Ruby Ponnudurai, Shinichi Sunagawa, Luis Pedro Coelho, Petra Schrotz-King, Emily Vogtmann, Nina Habermann, Emma Niméus, Andrew M. Thomas, Paolo Manghi, Sara Gandini, Davide Serrano, Sayaka Mizutani, Hirotsugu Shiroma, Satoshi Shiba, Tatsuhiro Shibata, Shinichi Yachida, Takuji Yamada, Levi Waldron, Alessio Naccarati, Nicola Segata, Rashmi Sinha, Cornelia M. Ulrich, Hermann Brenner, Manimozhiyan Arumugam, Peer Bork, Georg Zeller |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 334 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 | 59 | 18% |
| Germany | 22 | 7% |
| United Kingdom | 21 | 6% |
| Spain | 21 | 6% |
| Australia | 14 | 4% |
| Italy | 10 | 3% |
| France | 10 | 3% |
| Japan | 6 | 2% |
| Norway | 4 | 1% |
| Other | 52 | 16% |
| Unknown | 115 | 34% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 175 | 52% |
| Scientists | 133 | 40% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 16 | 5% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 10 | 3% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 851 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 851 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 152 | 18% |
| Researcher | 140 | 16% |
| Student > Master | 94 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 79 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 32 | 4% |
| Other | 103 | 12% |
| Unknown | 251 | 29% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 188 | 22% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 111 | 13% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 69 | 8% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 66 | 8% |
| Computer Science | 26 | 3% |
| Other | 100 | 12% |
| Unknown | 291 | 34% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 401. 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 25 October 2023.
All research outputs
#76,309
of 25,758,695 outputs
Outputs from Nature Medicine
#426
of 9,425 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#1,496
of 365,592 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nature Medicine
#6
of 95 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,758,695 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 9,425 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 105.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% 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 365,592 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 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 95 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 93% of its contemporaries.