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
| Chapter title |
Serotype Assignment by Sero-Agglutination, ELISA, and PCR
|
|---|---|
| Chapter number | 4 |
| Book title |
Listeria monocytogenes
|
| Published in |
Methods in molecular biology, January 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1007/978-1-4939-0703-8_4 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Book ISBNs |
978-1-4939-0702-1, 978-1-4939-0703-8
|
| Authors |
Lisa Gorski |
| Abstract |
For assessing isolates of Listeria monocytogenes serotype designation is the foremost subtyping method used. Traditionally, serotyping has been done with agglutination reactions. In the last decade, alternative serotyping methods were described using enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) and polymerase chain reaction (PCR). Herein are described the three methods, and the advantages and disadvantages of each. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 4 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 4 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 50% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 1 | 25% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine | 1 | 25% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 25% |
| Engineering | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 1 | 25% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 10 May 2014.
All research outputs
#18,371,959
of 22,755,127 outputs
Outputs from Methods in molecular biology
#7,865
of 13,089 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#229,360
of 305,249 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Methods in molecular biology
#294
of 597 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,755,127 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,089 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.3. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% 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 305,249 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 597 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.