↓ Skip to main content

Key Technologies for Progressing Discovery of Microbiome-Based Medicines

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Microbiology, June 2021
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 (94th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
12 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
16 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
66 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
Key Technologies for Progressing Discovery of Microbiome-Based Medicines
Published in
Frontiers in Microbiology, June 2021
DOI 10.3389/fmicb.2021.685935
Pubmed ID
Authors

Remy B. Young, Vanessa R. Marcelino, Michelle Chonwerawong, Emily L. Gulliver, Samuel C. Forster

Abstract

A growing number of experimental and computational approaches are illuminating the "microbial dark matter" and uncovering the integral role of commensal microbes in human health. Through this work, it is now clear that the human microbiome presents great potential as a therapeutic target for a plethora of diseases, including inflammatory bowel disease, diabetes and obesity. The development of more efficacious and targeted treatments relies on identification of causal links between the microbiome and disease; with future progress dependent on effective links between state-of-the-art sequencing approaches, computational analyses and experimental assays. We argue determining causation is essential, which can be attained by generating hypotheses using multi-omic functional analyses and validating these hypotheses in complex, biologically relevant experimental models. In this review we discuss existing analysis and validation methods, and propose best-practice approaches required to enable the next phase of microbiome research.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 12 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 66 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 66 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 15 23%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 15%
Student > Bachelor 3 5%
Professor > Associate Professor 3 5%
Student > Master 3 5%
Other 4 6%
Unknown 28 42%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 14 21%
Immunology and Microbiology 7 11%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 8%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 3%
Other 2 3%
Unknown 31 47%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 15. 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 22 August 2023.
All research outputs
#2,459,154
of 25,443,857 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Microbiology
#1,891
of 29,374 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#60,205
of 456,049 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Microbiology
#66
of 1,146 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,443,857 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 29,374 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 particularly well, scoring higher than 93% 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 456,049 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 1,146 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.