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 |
A systematic review of reported reassortant viral lineages of influenza A
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Infectious Diseases, January 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12879-015-1298-9 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Amy Pinsent, Christophe Fraser, Neil M. Ferguson, Steven Riley |
| Abstract |
Most previous evolutionary studies of influenza A have focussed on genetic drift, or reassortment of specific gene segments, hosts or subtypes. We conducted a systematic literature review to identify reported claimed reassortant influenza A lineages with genomic data available in GenBank, to obtain 646 unique first-report isolates out of a possible 20,781 open-access genomes. After adjusting for correlations, only: swine as host, China, Europe, Japan and years between 1997 and 2002; remained as significant risk factors for the reporting of reassortant viral lineages. For swine H1, more reassortants were observed in the North American H1 clade compared with the Eurasian avian-like H1N1 clade. Conversely, for avian H5 isolates, a higher number of reported reassortants were observed in the European H5N2/H3N2 clade compared with the H5N2 North American clade. Despite unavoidable biases (publication, database choice and upload propensity) these results synthesize a large majority of the current literature on novel reported influenza A reassortants and are a potentially useful prerequisite to inform further algorithmic studies. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 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 Kingdom | 2 | 29% |
| United States | 1 | 14% |
| Spain | 1 | 14% |
| Italy | 1 | 14% |
| Unknown | 2 | 29% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 4 | 57% |
| Members of the public | 3 | 43% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 54 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nigeria | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 53 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 12 | 22% |
| Researcher | 9 | 17% |
| Student > Master | 9 | 17% |
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 11% |
| Other | 3 | 6% |
| Other | 8 | 15% |
| Unknown | 7 | 13% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 12 | 22% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 11 | 20% |
| Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine | 7 | 13% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 7 | 13% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 6 | 11% |
| Other | 2 | 4% |
| Unknown | 9 | 17% |
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 08 January 2016.
All research outputs
#2,420,754
of 22,837,982 outputs
Outputs from BMC Infectious Diseases
#727
of 7,682 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#44,130
of 393,343 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Infectious Diseases
#10
of 97 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,837,982 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 7,682 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% 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 393,343 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 97 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.