↓ Skip to main content

Mycobacterium leprae genomes from a British medieval leprosy hospital: towards understanding an ancient epidemic

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Genomics, January 2014
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 (84th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (77th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
17 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
106 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
Mycobacterium leprae genomes from a British medieval leprosy hospital: towards understanding an ancient epidemic
Published in
BMC Genomics, January 2014
DOI 10.1186/1471-2164-15-270
Pubmed ID
Authors

Tom A Mendum, Verena J Schuenemann, Simon Roffey, G Taylor, Huihai Wu, Pushpendra Singh, Katie Tucker, Jason Hinds, Stewart T Cole, Andrzej M Kierzek, Kay Nieselt, Johannes Krause, Graham R Stewart

Abstract

Leprosy has afflicted humankind throughout history leaving evidence in both early texts and the archaeological record. In Britain, leprosy was widespread throughout the Middle Ages until its gradual and unexplained decline between the 14th and 16th centuries. The nature of this ancient endemic leprosy and its relationship to modern strains is only partly understood. Modern leprosy strains are currently divided into 5 phylogenetic groups, types 0 to 4, each with strong geographical links. Until recently, European strains, both ancient and modern, were thought to be exclusively type 3 strains. However, evidence for type 2 strains, a group normally associated with Central Asia and the Middle East, has recently been found in archaeological samples in Scandinavia and from two skeletons from the medieval leprosy hospital (or leprosarium) of St Mary Magdalen, near Winchester, England.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 17 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 106 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 2 2%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Unknown 103 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 20 19%
Student > Master 18 17%
Researcher 18 17%
Student > Bachelor 17 16%
Professor 6 6%
Other 15 14%
Unknown 12 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 31 29%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 23 22%
Medicine and Dentistry 9 8%
Social Sciences 7 7%
Immunology and Microbiology 6 6%
Other 18 17%
Unknown 12 11%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 February 2020.
All research outputs
#2,024,248
of 15,257,997 outputs
Outputs from BMC Genomics
#990
of 8,662 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#28,268
of 192,792 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Genomics
#2
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 15,257,997 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 85th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,662 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% 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 192,792 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 9 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 7 of them.