↓ Skip to main content

A Multi-Omic Systems-Based Approach Reveals Metabolic Markers of Bacterial Vaginosis and Insight into the Disease

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, February 2013
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 (95th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (92nd percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
1 X user
patent
6 patents
facebook
2 Facebook pages
wikipedia
9 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
112 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
171 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.
Title
A Multi-Omic Systems-Based Approach Reveals Metabolic Markers of Bacterial Vaginosis and Insight into the Disease
Published in
PLOS ONE, February 2013
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0056111
Pubmed ID
Authors

Carl J. Yeoman, Susan M. Thomas, Margret E. Berg Miller, Alexander V. Ulanov, Manolito Torralba, Sarah Lucas, Marcus Gillis, Melissa Cregger, Andres Gomez, Mengfei Ho, Steven R. Leigh, Rebecca Stumpf, Douglas J. Creedon, Michael A. Smith, Jon S. Weisbaum, Karen E. Nelson, Brenda A. Wilson, Bryan A. White

Abstract

Bacterial vaginosis (BV) is the most common vaginal disorder of reproductive-age women. Yet the cause of BV has not been established. To uncover key determinants of BV, we employed a multi-omic, systems-biology approach, including both deep 16S rRNA gene-based sequencing and metabolomics of lavage samples from 36 women. These women varied demographically, behaviorally, and in terms of health status and symptoms.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 171 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 5 3%
United Kingdom 2 1%
Slovenia 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Denmark 1 <1%
Unknown 161 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 42 25%
Researcher 28 16%
Student > Master 24 14%
Student > Bachelor 15 9%
Student > Postgraduate 9 5%
Other 30 18%
Unknown 23 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 53 31%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 24 14%
Medicine and Dentistry 22 13%
Immunology and Microbiology 14 8%
Engineering 6 4%
Other 20 12%
Unknown 32 19%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 28. 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 19 January 2023.
All research outputs
#1,239,111
of 23,565,002 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#16,228
of 201,994 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#11,890
of 286,999 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#388
of 5,053 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,565,002 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 201,994 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.3. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% 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 286,999 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 5,053 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 92% of its contemporaries.