↓ Skip to main content
Embed badge What is this page?

Comparative genomics of prevaccination and modern Bordetella pertussis strains

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Genomics, November 2010
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 (86th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (85th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
4 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
76 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
70 Mendeley
citeulike
3 CiteULike

What is this page?

Summary Blogs Twitter Dimensions citations
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
Comparative genomics of prevaccination and modern Bordetella pertussis strains
Published in
BMC Genomics, November 2010
DOI 10.1186/1471-2164-11-627
Pubmed ID
21070624
Authors

Marieke J Bart, Marjolein van Gent, Han GJ van der Heide, Jos Boekhorst, Peter Hermans, Julian Parkhill, Frits R Mooi

Abstract

Despite vaccination since the 1950s, pertussis has persisted and resurged. It remains a major cause of infant death worldwide and is the most prevalent vaccine-preventable disease in developed countries. The resurgence of pertussis has been associated with the expansion of Bordetella pertussis strains with a novel allele for the pertussis toxin (Ptx) promoter, ptxP3, which have replaced resident ptxP1 strains. Compared to ptxP1 strains, ptxP3 produce more Ptx resulting in increased virulence and immune suppression. To elucidate how B. pertussis has adapted to vaccination, we compared genome sequences of two ptxP3 strains with four strains isolated before and after the introduction vaccination.

View on publisher site

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 70 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Netherlands 2 3%
Hungary 1 1%
France 1 1%
Brazil 1 1%
Sweden 1 1%
United Kingdom 1 1%
Unknown 63 90%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 16 23%
Student > Bachelor 9 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 13%
Professor 7 10%
Student > Master 7 10%
Other 13 19%
Unknown 9 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 34 49%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 10 14%
Immunology and Microbiology 5 7%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 4%
Other 2 3%
Unknown 11 16%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 April 2015.
All research outputs
#3,250,566
of 22,663,150 outputs
Outputs from BMC Genomics
#1,271
of 10,613 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#13,849
of 100,846 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Genomics
#10
of 68 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,663,150 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 85th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 10,613 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% 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 100,846 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 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 68 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.

This page is provided by Altmetric.