| Title |
Human commensals producing a novel antibiotic impair pathogen colonization
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Nature, July 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1038/nature18634 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Alexander Zipperer, Martin C. Konnerth, Claudia Laux, Anne Berscheid, Daniela Janek, Christopher Weidenmaier, Marc Burian, Nadine A. Schilling, Christoph Slavetinsky, Matthias Marschal, Matthias Willmann, Hubert Kalbacher, Birgit Schittek, Heike Brötz-Oesterhelt, Stephanie Grond, Andreas Peschel, Bernhard Krismer |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 704 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 | 116 | 16% |
| United Kingdom | 65 | 9% |
| Spain | 22 | 3% |
| Germany | 20 | 3% |
| Canada | 18 | 3% |
| Japan | 14 | 2% |
| France | 11 | 2% |
| India | 10 | 1% |
| Mexico | 10 | 1% |
| Other | 125 | 18% |
| Unknown | 293 | 42% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 471 | 67% |
| Scientists | 170 | 24% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 47 | 7% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 15 | 2% |
| Unknown | 1 | <1% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 1,402 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 8 | <1% |
| Germany | 5 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 4 | <1% |
| France | 2 | <1% |
| China | 2 | <1% |
| Denmark | 2 | <1% |
| Australia | 1 | <1% |
| Brazil | 1 | <1% |
| South Africa | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 10 | <1% |
| Unknown | 1366 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 269 | 19% |
| Student > Bachelor | 232 | 17% |
| Researcher | 226 | 16% |
| Student > Master | 144 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 62 | 4% |
| Other | 228 | 16% |
| Unknown | 241 | 17% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 294 | 21% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 289 | 21% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 159 | 11% |
| Chemistry | 119 | 8% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 109 | 8% |
| Other | 146 | 10% |
| Unknown | 286 | 20% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2572. 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 March 2024.
All research outputs
#2,969
of 25,768,270 outputs
Outputs from Nature
#314
of 98,693 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#21
of 381,451 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nature
#4
of 953 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,768,270 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 98,693 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 102.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% 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 381,451 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 953 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 99% of its contemporaries.