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 |
Updateon different aspects of HCV variability: focus on NS5B polymerase
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Infectious Diseases, September 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1471-2334-14-s5-s1 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Nadia Marascio, Carlo Torti, Maria Carla Liberto, Alfredo Focà |
| Abstract |
The study of hepatitis C virus (HCV) genotypes/subtypes, quasispecies and recombinants obtained by virus genome sequencing are important for epidemiological studies, to trace the source of infection, for development of new direct acting antivirals (DAAs) therapy and for understanding antiviral selection pressures. The HCV NS5B gene encodes a polymerase, which is responsible for virus replication and is a potential target for the development of antiviral agents. Many studies for classification of HCV use a particular segment of the NS5B gene, in addition to other specific regions, and phylogenetic analysis. Actually, some nucleoside/nucleotide analogues and non-nucleoside inhibitors target NS5B protein. This review focuses on HCV variability, phylogenetic analysis and the role of NS5B in the virus-host interactions. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 50 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 1 | 2% |
| Netherlands | 1 | 2% |
| France | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 47 | 94% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 11 | 22% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 9 | 18% |
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 14% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 6 | 12% |
| Researcher | 5 | 10% |
| Other | 8 | 16% |
| Unknown | 4 | 8% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 14 | 28% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 13 | 26% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 10 | 20% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 4 | 8% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 3 | 6% |
| Other | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 5 | 10% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 26 September 2014.
All research outputs
#15,306,466
of 22,764,165 outputs
Outputs from BMC Infectious Diseases
#4,451
of 7,666 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#137,743
of 238,416 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Infectious Diseases
#89
of 149 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,764,165 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,666 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.6. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% 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 238,416 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 149 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.