↓ Skip to main content

Clinical use of whole genome sequencing for Mycobacterium tuberculosis

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medicine, March 2016
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 (82nd percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
93 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
275 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
Clinical use of whole genome sequencing for Mycobacterium tuberculosis
Published in
BMC Medicine, March 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12916-016-0598-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Adam A. Witney, Catherine A. Cosgrove, Amber Arnold, Jason Hinds, Neil G. Stoker, Philip D. Butcher

Abstract

Drug-resistant tuberculosis (TB) remains a major challenge to global health and to healthcare in the UK. In 2014, a total of 6,520 cases of TB were recorded in England, of which 1.4 % were multidrug-resistant TB (MDR-TB). Extensively drug-resistant TB (XDR-TB) occurs at a much lower rate, but the impact on the patient and hospital is severe. Current diagnostic methods such as drug susceptibility testing and targeted molecular tests are slow to return or examine only a limited number of target regions, respectively. Faster, more comprehensive diagnostics will enable earlier use of the most appropriate drug regimen, thus improving patient outcomes and reducing overall healthcare costs. Whole genome sequencing (WGS) has been shown to provide a rapid and comprehensive view of the genotype of the organism, and thus enable reliable prediction of the drug susceptibility phenotype within a clinically relevant timeframe. In addition, it provides the highest resolution when investigating transmission events in possible outbreak scenarios. However, robust software and database tools need to be developed for the full potential to be realized in this specialized area of medicine.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 275 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Portugal 1 <1%
Unknown 274 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 47 17%
Researcher 35 13%
Student > Bachelor 30 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 29 11%
Other 15 5%
Other 54 20%
Unknown 65 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 46 17%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 44 16%
Immunology and Microbiology 33 12%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 28 10%
Engineering 8 3%
Other 37 13%
Unknown 79 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 16 August 2016.
All research outputs
#3,176,806
of 22,858,915 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medicine
#1,818
of 3,438 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#53,857
of 300,567 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medicine
#29
of 52 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,858,915 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 86th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,438 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 43.6. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% 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 300,567 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 82% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 52 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.