↓ Skip to main content

Communicating the promise, risks, and ethics of large-scale, open space microbiome and metagenome research

Overview of attention for article published in Microbiome, October 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (92nd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (79th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
49 tweeters
facebook
3 Facebook pages
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Readers on

mendeley
13 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
Communicating the promise, risks, and ethics of large-scale, open space microbiome and metagenome research
Published in
Microbiome, October 2017
DOI 10.1186/s40168-017-0349-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Daria Shamarina, Iana Stoyantcheva, Christopher E. Mason, Kyle Bibby, Eran Elhaik

Abstract

The public commonly associates microorganisms with pathogens. This suspicion of microorganisms is understandable, as historically microorganisms have killed more humans than any other agent while remaining largely unknown until the late seventeenth century with the works of van Leeuwenhoek and Kircher. Despite our improved understanding regarding microorganisms, the general public are apt to think of diseases rather than of the majority of harmless or beneficial species that inhabit our bodies and the built and natural environment. As long as microbiome research was confined to labs, the public's exposure to microbiology was limited. The recent launch of global microbiome surveys, such as the Earth Microbiome Project and MetaSUB (Metagenomics and Metadesign of Subways and Urban Biomes) project, has raised ethical, financial, feasibility, and sustainability concerns as to the public's level of understanding and potential reaction to the findings, which, done improperly, risk negative implications for ongoing and future investigations, but done correctly, can facilitate a new vision of "smart cities." To facilitate improved future research, we describe here the major concerns that our discussions with ethics committees, community leaders, and government officials have raised, and we expound on how to address them. We further discuss ethical considerations of microbiome surveys and provide practical recommendations for public engagement.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 49 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 13 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 13 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 6 46%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 31%
Student > Postgraduate 1 8%
Student > Master 1 8%
Unspecified 1 8%
Other 0 0%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 46%
Computer Science 2 15%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 15%
Unspecified 1 8%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 8%
Other 1 8%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 30. 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 27 October 2017.
All research outputs
#328,454
of 8,630,954 outputs
Outputs from Microbiome
#91
of 373 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#14,979
of 211,112 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Microbiome
#9
of 43 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 8,630,954 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 373 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 42.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% 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 211,112 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 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 43 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its contemporaries.