↓ Skip to main content

Molecular tools in understanding the evolution of Vibrio cholerae

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Microbiology, October 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
32 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
89 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
Molecular tools in understanding the evolution of Vibrio cholerae
Published in
Frontiers in Microbiology, October 2015
DOI 10.3389/fmicb.2015.01040
Pubmed ID
Authors

Habibur Rahaman, Tarequl Islam, Rita R. Colwell, Munirul Alam

Abstract

Vibrio cholerae, the etiological agent of cholera, has been a scourge for centuries. Cholera remains a serious health threat for developing countries and has been responsible for millions of deaths globally over the past 200 years. Identification of V. cholerae has been accomplished using a variety of methods, ranging from phenotypic strategies to DNA based molecular typing and currently whole genomic approaches. This array of methods has been adopted in epidemiological investigations, either singly or in the aggregate, and more recently for evolutionary analyses of V. cholerae. Because the new technologies have been developed at an ever increasing pace, this review of the range of fingerprinting strategies, their relative advantages and limitations, and cholera case studies was undertaken. The task was challenging, considering the vast amount of the information available. To assist the study, key references representative of several areas of research are provided with the intent to provide readers with a comprehensive view of recent advances in the molecular epidemiology of V. cholerae. Suggestions for ways to obviate many of the current limitations of typing techniques are also provided. In summary, a comparative report has been prepared that includes the range from traditional typing to whole genomic strategies.

Timeline

Login to access the full chart related to this output.

If you don’t have an account, click here to discover Explorer

X Demographics

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.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 89 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 89 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 16 18%
Student > Master 16 18%
Researcher 15 17%
Student > Bachelor 9 10%
Student > Postgraduate 5 6%
Other 9 10%
Unknown 19 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 18 20%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 13 15%
Medicine and Dentistry 12 13%
Immunology and Microbiology 12 13%
Environmental Science 3 3%
Other 9 10%
Unknown 22 25%
Attention Score in Context

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 07 October 2015.
All research outputs
#20,293,238
of 22,829,683 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Microbiology
#22,401
of 24,800 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#233,234
of 277,991 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Microbiology
#349
of 433 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,829,683 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 24,800 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.3. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 277,991 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 433 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.