↓ Skip to main content

Genomic characterisation of an endometrial pathogenic Escherichia coli strain reveals the acquisition of genetic elements associated with extra-intestinal pathogenicity

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Genomics, December 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (77th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (74th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
11 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
41 Mendeley
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.
Title
Genomic characterisation of an endometrial pathogenic Escherichia coli strain reveals the acquisition of genetic elements associated with extra-intestinal pathogenicity
Published in
BMC Genomics, December 2014
DOI 10.1186/1471-2164-15-1075
Pubmed ID
Authors

Robert J Goldstone, Roman Popat, Hans-Joachim Schuberth, Olivier Sandra, I Martin Sheldon, David GE Smith

Abstract

Strains of Escherichia coli cause a wide variety of intestinal and extra-intestinal diseases in both humans and animals, and are also often found in healthy individuals or the environment. Broadly, a strong phylogenetic relationship exists that distinguishes most E. coli causing intestinal disease from those that cause extra-intestinal disease, however, isolates within a recently described subclass of Extra-Intestinal Pathogenic E. coli (ExPEC), termed endometrial pathogenic E. coli, tend to be phylogenetically distant from the vast majority of characterised ExPECs, and more closely related to human intestinal pathogens. In this work, we investigate the genetic basis for ExPEC infection in the prototypic endometrial pathogenic E. coli strain MS499.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 41 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 2%
Brazil 1 2%
Unknown 39 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 27%
Researcher 6 15%
Student > Master 6 15%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 12%
Other 3 7%
Other 6 15%
Unknown 4 10%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 12 29%
Medicine and Dentistry 7 17%
Immunology and Microbiology 6 15%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 2 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 5%
Other 3 7%
Unknown 9 22%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 30 December 2014.
All research outputs
#3,037,179
of 12,373,620 outputs
Outputs from BMC Genomics
#1,718
of 7,313 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#62,690
of 275,503 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Genomics
#62
of 258 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,373,620 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,313 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% 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 275,503 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 77% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 258 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 74% of its contemporaries.