The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users 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.
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 |
Pathogen Security-Help or Hindrance?
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology, January 2015
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fbioe.2014.00083 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Stephen A. Morse |
| Abstract |
Events over the past 15 years have resulted in the promulgation of regulations in the United States to enhance biosecurity by restricting the access to pathogens and toxins (i.e., biological select agents and toxins [BSATs]), which pose a severe threat to human being, animal, or plant health or to animal or plant products, to qualified institutions, laboratories, and scientists. These regulations also reduce biosafety concerns by imposing specific requirements on laboratories working with BSATs. Furthermore, they provide a legal framework for prosecuting someone who possesses a BSAT illegally. With the implementation of these regulations has come discussion in the scientific community about the potential of these regulations to affect the cost of doing BSAT research, hamper research and international collaborations, or whether it would stop someone with a microbiological background from isolating many of the select agents from nature. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Switzerland | 1 | 50% |
| Canada | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 20 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 20 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 4 | 20% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 10% |
| Researcher | 2 | 10% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 10% |
| Professor | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 3 | 15% |
| Unknown | 6 | 30% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 20% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 2 | 10% |
| Environmental Science | 1 | 5% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 5% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 5 | 25% |
| Unknown | 6 | 30% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 06 January 2015.
All research outputs
#14,783,688
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology
#1,792
of 8,501 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#180,191
of 358,894 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology
#22
of 44 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,501 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% 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 358,894 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 44 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 50% of its contemporaries.