↓ Skip to main content

Metagenomics for pathogen detection in public health

Overview of attention for article published in Genome Medicine, January 2013
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 (88th percentile)

Mentioned by

10 tweeters
1 patent
1 Facebook page
1 Wikipedia page


155 Dimensions

Readers on

448 Mendeley
2 CiteULike
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.
Metagenomics for pathogen detection in public health
Published in
Genome Medicine, January 2013
DOI 10.1186/gm485
Pubmed ID

Ruth R Miller, Vincent Montoya, Jennifer L Gardy, David M Patrick, Patrick Tang


Traditional pathogen detection methods in public health infectious disease surveillance rely upon the identification of agents that are already known to be associated with a particular clinical syndrome. The emerging field of metagenomics has the potential to revolutionize pathogen detection in public health laboratories by allowing the simultaneous detection of all microorganisms in a clinical sample, without a priori knowledge of their identities, through the use of next-generation DNA sequencing. A single metagenomics analysis has the potential to detect rare and novel pathogens, and to uncover the role of dysbiotic microbiomes in infectious and chronic human disease. Making use of advances in sequencing platforms and bioinformatics tools, recent studies have shown that metagenomics can even determine the whole-genome sequences of pathogens, allowing inferences about antibiotic resistance, virulence, evolution and transmission to be made. We are entering an era in which more novel infectious diseases will be identified through metagenomics-based methods than through traditional laboratory methods. The impetus is now on public health laboratories to integrate metagenomics techniques into their diagnostic arsenals.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 448 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 5 1%
United States 4 <1%
United Kingdom 2 <1%
Turkey 1 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
Portugal 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Sweden 1 <1%
Unknown 432 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 101 23%
Student > Ph. D. Student 73 16%
Student > Bachelor 60 13%
Student > Master 58 13%
Other 26 6%
Other 77 17%
Unknown 53 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 144 32%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 85 19%
Medicine and Dentistry 38 8%
Immunology and Microbiology 28 6%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 14 3%
Other 58 13%
Unknown 81 18%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. 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 02 June 2020.
All research outputs
of 21,806,258 outputs
Outputs from Genome Medicine
of 1,384 outputs
Outputs of similar age
of 184,436 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Genome Medicine
of 4 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 21,806,258 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,384 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 25.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% 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 184,436 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 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4 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