↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Article Metrics

Treatment of relapsing Clostridium difficile infection using fecal microbiota transplantation

Overview of attention for article published in Clinical and Experimental Gastroenterology, December 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (73rd percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (55th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 tweeters
patent
24 patents

Citations

dimensions_citation
27 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
73 Mendeley
Title
Treatment of relapsing Clostridium difficile infection using fecal microbiota transplantation
Published in
Clinical and Experimental Gastroenterology, December 2013
DOI 10.2147/ceg.s53410
Pubmed ID
Authors

Hilary Enuh, Rahul Pathak, Anish Patel, Prasanna Wickremesinghe

Abstract

Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) has become a global concern over the last decade. In the United States, CDI escalated in incidence from 1996 to 2005 from 31 to 64/100,000. In 2010, there were 500,000 cases of CDI with an estimated mortality up to 20,000 cases a year. The significance of this problem is evident from the hospital costs of over 3 billion dollars annually. Fecal microbiota transplant (FMT) was first described in 1958 and since then about 500 cases have been published in literature in various small series and case reports. This procedure has been reported mainly from centers outside of the United States and acceptance of the practice has been difficult. Recently the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) labeled FMT as a biological drug; as a result, guidelines will soon be required to help establish it as a mainstream treatment. More US experience needs to be reported to popularize this procedure here and form guidelines.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 73 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 1%
Unknown 72 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 12 16%
Student > Master 11 15%
Researcher 9 12%
Professor > Associate Professor 8 11%
Other 8 11%
Other 17 23%
Unknown 8 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 31 42%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 15 21%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 8 11%
Immunology and Microbiology 4 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 3%
Other 3 4%
Unknown 10 14%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 02 February 2021.
All research outputs
#4,866,091
of 17,360,236 outputs
Outputs from Clinical and Experimental Gastroenterology
#64
of 248 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#67,027
of 263,078 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical and Experimental Gastroenterology
#4
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 17,360,236 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 70th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 248 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% 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 263,078 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 9 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 5 of them.