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 |
A core microbiome associated with the peritoneal tumors of pseudomyxoma peritonei
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases, July 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1750-1172-8-105 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jeremy J Gilbreath, Cristina Semino-Mora, Christopher J Friedline, Hui Liu, Kip L Bodi, Thomas J McAvoy, Jennifer Francis, Carol Nieroda, Armando Sardi, Andre Dubois, David W Lazinski, Andrew Camilli, Traci L Testerman, D Scott Merrell |
| Abstract |
Pseudomyxoma peritonei (PMP) is a malignancy characterized by dissemination of mucus-secreting cells throughout the peritoneum. This disease is associated with significant morbidity and mortality and despite effective treatment options for early-stage disease, patients with PMP often relapse. Thus, there is a need for additional treatment options to reduce relapse rate and increase long-term survival. A previous study identified the presence of both typed and non-culturable bacteria associated with PMP tissue and determined that increased bacterial density was associated with more severe disease. These findings highlighted the possible role for bacteria in PMP disease. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 3 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 70 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Germany | 1 | 1% |
| Belgium | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 68 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 17 | 24% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 9 | 13% |
| Other | 6 | 9% |
| Student > Master | 6 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 7% |
| Other | 18 | 26% |
| Unknown | 9 | 13% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 12 | 17% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 11 | 16% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 9 | 13% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 5 | 7% |
| Engineering | 4 | 6% |
| Other | 12 | 17% |
| Unknown | 17 | 24% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 05 January 2014.
All research outputs
#14,755,656
of 22,714,025 outputs
Outputs from Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases
#1,686
of 2,603 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#115,807
of 194,569 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases
#19
of 32 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,714,025 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,603 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.5. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 194,569 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 32 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.