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 |
Approval of Raxibacumab for the Treatment of Inhalation Anthrax Under the US Food and Drug Administration “Animal Rule”
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Microbiology, December 2015
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fmicb.2015.01320 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Chia-Wei Tsai, Stephen Morris |
| Abstract |
On December 14, 2012, the FDA approved Raxibacumab, the first monoclonal antibody product developed under Project BioShield to achieve this milestone, and the first biologic product to be approved through the FDA animal efficacy rule (or "Animal Rule"). Raxibacumab is approved for the treatment of adult and pediatric patients with inhalational anthrax due to Bacillus anthracis in combination with appropriate antibiotic drugs and for prophylaxis of inhalational anthrax when alternative therapies are not available or not appropriate. The developmental process required for approval of Raxibacumab illustrates many of the challenges that product developers may encounter when pursuing approval under the Animal Rule and highlights a number of important regulatory and policy issues. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
| Scientists | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 73 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 1% |
| Kenya | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 71 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 15 | 21% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 12 | 16% |
| Researcher | 9 | 12% |
| Student > Master | 8 | 11% |
| Other | 3 | 4% |
| Other | 6 | 8% |
| Unknown | 20 | 27% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 16 | 22% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 8 | 11% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 7 | 10% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 6 | 8% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 5 | 7% |
| Other | 9 | 12% |
| Unknown | 22 | 30% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 01 November 2023.
All research outputs
#4,396,113
of 24,778,793 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Microbiology
#4,107
of 28,243 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#68,522
of 398,556 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Microbiology
#59
of 409 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,778,793 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 82nd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 28,243 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% 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 398,556 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 82% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 409 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.