| Title |
Commentary on key aspects of fecal microbiota transplantation in small animal practice
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Veterinary Medicine : Research and Reports, May 2016
|
| DOI | 10.2147/vmrr.s105238 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jennifer Chaitman, Albert E Jergens, Frederic Gaschen, Jose F Garcia-Mazcorro, Stanley L Marks, Alicia G Marroquin-Cardona, Keith Richter, Giacomo Rossi, Jan S Suchodolski, J Scott Weese |
| Abstract |
The gastrointestinal tract of dogs, cats, and other mammals including humans harbors millions of beneficial microorganisms that regulate and maintain health. Fecal microbiota transplantation (FMT) is a procedure involving the administration of a fecal infusion from a healthy individual (donor) to a patient with disease to help improve health. Despite the effectiveness of FMT to treat intestinal disorders in humans, in particular recurrent Clostridium difficile infection, there is a paucity of scientific data regarding the application of FMT in veterinary patients. Here, we outline key aspects of FMT in small animal practice. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 40% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 20% |
| Unknown | 2 | 40% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 5 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 123 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 123 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 16 | 13% |
| Student > Master | 16 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 13 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 10 | 8% |
| Researcher | 9 | 7% |
| Other | 19 | 15% |
| Unknown | 40 | 33% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine | 53 | 43% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 11 | 9% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 5 | 4% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 2% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 3 | 2% |
| Other | 3 | 2% |
| Unknown | 45 | 37% |
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 14 December 2021.
All research outputs
#8,354,398
of 25,611,630 outputs
Outputs from Veterinary Medicine : Research and Reports
#37
of 136 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#109,758
of 312,405 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Veterinary Medicine : Research and Reports
#1
of 3 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,611,630 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 66th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 136 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 23.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% 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 312,405 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 63% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them