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
| Title |
Mechanistic Insights in the Success of Fecal Microbiota Transplants for the Treatment of Clostridium difficile Infections
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Microbiology, June 2018
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fmicb.2018.01242 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Amoe Baktash, Elisabeth M. Terveer, Romy D. Zwittink, Bastian V. H. Hornung, Jeroen Corver, Ed J. Kuijper, Wiep Klaas Smits |
| Abstract |
Fecal microbiota transplantation has proven to be an effective treatment for infections with the gram-positive enteropathogen Clostridium difficile. Despite its effectiveness, the exact mechanisms that underlie its success are largely unclear. In this review, we highlight the pleiotropic effectors that are transferred during fecal microbiota transfer and relate this to the C. difficile lifecycle. In doing so, we show that it is likely that multiple factors contribute to the elimination of symptoms of C. difficile infections after fecal microbiota transplantation. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 40 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 12 | 30% |
| Netherlands | 3 | 8% |
| France | 2 | 5% |
| Australia | 2 | 5% |
| United Kingdom | 2 | 5% |
| Canada | 1 | 3% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 3% |
| Austria | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 16 | 40% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 19 | 48% |
| Members of the public | 18 | 45% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 3 | 8% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 185 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 185 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 29 | 16% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 21 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 19 | 10% |
| Student > Master | 18 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 10 | 5% |
| Other | 23 | 12% |
| Unknown | 65 | 35% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 31 | 17% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 25 | 14% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 21 | 11% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 13 | 7% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 4 | 2% |
| Other | 21 | 11% |
| Unknown | 70 | 38% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 32. 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 29 October 2019.
All research outputs
#1,252,984
of 25,711,518 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Microbiology
#724
of 29,727 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#26,379
of 342,540 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Microbiology
#21
of 688 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,711,518 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 29,727 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% 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 342,540 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 688 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.