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 |
Stool substitute transplant therapy for the eradication of Clostridium difficile infection: ‘RePOOPulating’ the gut
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Microbiome, January 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1186/2049-2618-1-3 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Elaine O Petrof, Gregory B Gloor, Stephen J Vanner, Scott J Weese, David Carter, Michelle C Daigneault, Eric M Brown, Kathleen Schroeter, Emma Allen-Vercoe |
| Abstract |
Fecal bacteriotherapy ('stool transplant') can be effective in treating recurrent Clostridium difficile infection, but concerns of donor infection transmission and patient acceptance limit its use. Here we describe the use of a stool substitute preparation, made from purified intestinal bacterial cultures derived from a single healthy donor, to treat recurrent C. difficile infection that had failed repeated standard antibiotics. Thirty-three isolates were recovered from a healthy donor stool sample. Two patients who had failed at least three courses of metronidazole or vancomycin underwent colonoscopy and the mixture was infused throughout the right and mid colon. Pre-treatment and post-treatment stool samples were analyzed by 16 S rRNA gene sequencing using the Ion Torrent platform. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 136 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 | 37 | 27% |
| United Kingdom | 17 | 13% |
| Canada | 16 | 12% |
| Ireland | 3 | 2% |
| Australia | 3 | 2% |
| France | 2 | 1% |
| Sweden | 2 | 1% |
| South Africa | 1 | <1% |
| Italy | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 10 | 7% |
| Unknown | 44 | 32% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 88 | 65% |
| Scientists | 30 | 22% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 12 | 9% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 6 | 4% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 933 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 17 | 2% |
| Canada | 7 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 7 | <1% |
| Denmark | 3 | <1% |
| Spain | 2 | <1% |
| Sweden | 2 | <1% |
| Chile | 1 | <1% |
| Brazil | 1 | <1% |
| Malaysia | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 11 | 1% |
| Unknown | 881 | 94% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 164 | 18% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 143 | 15% |
| Student > Bachelor | 134 | 14% |
| Student > Master | 100 | 11% |
| Other | 58 | 6% |
| Other | 185 | 20% |
| Unknown | 149 | 16% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 264 | 28% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 204 | 22% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 109 | 12% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 71 | 8% |
| Engineering | 22 | 2% |
| Other | 91 | 10% |
| Unknown | 172 | 18% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 339. 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 19 March 2024.
All research outputs
#98,750
of 25,734,859 outputs
Outputs from Microbiome
#32
of 1,792 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#530
of 292,191 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Microbiome
#1
of 7 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,734,859 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,792 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 38.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% 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 292,191 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 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 7 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them