| Title |
The future of faecal transplants
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Nature Reviews Microbiology, September 2019
|
| DOI | 10.1038/s41579-019-0271-9 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Edward M. Giles, Gemma L. D’Adamo, Samuel C. Forster |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 16 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Australia | 3 | 19% |
| Switzerland | 2 | 13% |
| India | 1 | 6% |
| United States | 1 | 6% |
| Unknown | 9 | 56% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 7 | 44% |
| Members of the public | 6 | 38% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 13% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 6% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 90 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 90 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 14 | 16% |
| Student > Bachelor | 14 | 16% |
| Researcher | 13 | 14% |
| Student > Master | 6 | 7% |
| Other | 4 | 4% |
| Other | 12 | 13% |
| Unknown | 27 | 30% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 14 | 16% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 10 | 11% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 9 | 10% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 7 | 8% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 5 | 6% |
| Other | 11 | 12% |
| Unknown | 34 | 38% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 21. 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 01 March 2024.
All research outputs
#1,819,943
of 25,611,630 outputs
Outputs from Nature Reviews Microbiology
#795
of 2,876 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#37,517
of 354,169 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nature Reviews Microbiology
#16
of 40 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,611,630 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,876 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 43.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% 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 354,169 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 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 40 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 62% of its contemporaries.