| Title |
Clinical Sequencing Uncovers Origins and Evolution of Lassa Virus
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cell, August 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1016/j.cell.2015.07.020 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Kristian G. Andersen, B. Jesse Shapiro, Christian B. Matranga, Rachel Sealfon, Aaron E. Lin, Lina M. Moses, Onikepe A. Folarin, Augustine Goba, Ikponmwonsa Odia, Philomena E. Ehiane, Mambu Momoh, Eleina M. England, Sarah Winnicki, Luis M. Branco, Stephen K. Gire, Eric Phelan, Ridhi Tariyal, Ryan Tewhey, Omowunmi Omoniwa, Mohammed Fullah, Richard Fonnie, Mbalu Fonnie, Lansana Kanneh, Simbirie Jalloh, Michael Gbakie, Sidiki Saffa, Kandeh Karbo, Adrianne D. Gladden, James Qu, Matthew Stremlau, Mahan Nekoui, Hilary K. Finucane, Shervin Tabrizi, Joseph J. Vitti, Bruce Birren, Michael Fitzgerald, Caryn McCowan, Andrea Ireland, Aaron M. Berlin, James Bochicchio, Barbara Tazon-Vega, Niall J. Lennon, Elizabeth M. Ryan, Zach Bjornson, Danny A. Milner, Amanda K. Lukens, Nisha Broodie, Megan Rowland, Megan Heinrich, Marjan Akdag, John S. Schieffelin, Danielle Levy, Henry Akpan, Daniel G. Bausch, Kathleen Rubins, Joseph B. McCormick, Eric S. Lander, Stephan Günther, Lisa Hensley, Sylvanus Okogbenin, Viral Hemorrhagic Fever Consortium, Stephen F. Schaffner, Peter O. Okokhere, S. Humarr Khan, Donald S. Grant, George O. Akpede, Danny A. Asogun, Andreas Gnirke, Joshua Z. Levin, Christian T. Happi, Robert F. Garry, Pardis C. Sabeti |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 87 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 | 25 | 29% |
| United Kingdom | 12 | 14% |
| Canada | 4 | 5% |
| Germany | 3 | 3% |
| Spain | 3 | 3% |
| Australia | 2 | 2% |
| Latvia | 1 | 1% |
| Rwanda | 1 | 1% |
| Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of | 1 | 1% |
| Other | 2 | 2% |
| Unknown | 33 | 38% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 50 | 57% |
| Scientists | 31 | 36% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 4 | 5% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 2 | 2% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 398 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | <1% |
| Finland | 1 | <1% |
| Netherlands | 1 | <1% |
| Japan | 1 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 392 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 74 | 19% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 72 | 18% |
| Student > Master | 54 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 39 | 10% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 27 | 7% |
| Other | 64 | 16% |
| Unknown | 68 | 17% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 87 | 22% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 72 | 18% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 47 | 12% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 33 | 8% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 18 | 5% |
| Other | 56 | 14% |
| Unknown | 85 | 21% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 155. 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 07 January 2024.
All research outputs
#267,530
of 25,579,912 outputs
Outputs from Cell
#1,462
of 17,223 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#2,872
of 276,752 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cell
#16
of 181 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,579,912 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 17,223 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 59.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% 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 276,752 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 181 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 91% of its contemporaries.