↓ Skip to main content

The adult nasopharyngeal microbiome as a determinant of pneumococcal acquisition

Overview of attention for article published in Microbiome, December 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 (90th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (53rd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
7 X users
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
65 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
133 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
The adult nasopharyngeal microbiome as a determinant of pneumococcal acquisition
Published in
Microbiome, December 2014
DOI 10.1186/2049-2618-2-44
Pubmed ID
Authors

Amelieke JH Cremers, Aldert L Zomer, Jenna F Gritzfeld, Gerben Ferwerda, Sacha AFT van Hijum, Daniela M Ferreira, Joshua R Shak, Keith P Klugman, Jos Boekhorst, Harro M Timmerman, Marien I de Jonge, Stephen B Gordon, Peter WM Hermans

Abstract

Several cohort studies have indicated associations between S. pneumoniae and other microbes in the nasopharynx. To study causal relationships between the nasopharyngeal microbiome and pneumococcal carriage, we employed an experimental human pneumococcal carriage model. Healthy adult volunteers were assessed for pneumococcal carriage by culture of nasal wash samples (NWS). Those without natural pneumococcal carriage received an intranasal pneumococcal inoculation with serotype 6B or 23F. The composition of the nasopharyngeal microbiome was longitudinally studied by 16S rDNA pyrosequencing on NWS collected before and after challenge.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 X users 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 133 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Canada 2 2%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Thailand 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 127 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 33 25%
Researcher 27 20%
Student > Master 17 13%
Student > Bachelor 12 9%
Other 7 5%
Other 19 14%
Unknown 18 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 37 28%
Immunology and Microbiology 22 17%
Medicine and Dentistry 22 17%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 11 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 2%
Other 13 10%
Unknown 25 19%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 14. 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 24 January 2020.
All research outputs
#2,469,665
of 24,885,505 outputs
Outputs from Microbiome
#985
of 1,705 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#33,444
of 365,925 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Microbiome
#7
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,885,505 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,705 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 38.5. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% 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 365,925 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 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 13 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% of its contemporaries.