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 |
Sharing and re-use of phylogenetic trees (and associated data) to facilitate synthesis
|
---|---|
Published in |
BMC Research Notes, October 2012
|
DOI | 10.1186/1756-0500-5-574 |
Pubmed ID | |
Authors |
Arlin Stoltzfus, Brian O'Meara, Jamie Whitacre, Ross Mounce, Emily L Gillespie, Sudhir Kumar, Dan F Rosauer, Rutger A Vos |
Abstract |
Recently, various evolution-related journals adopted policies to encourage or require archiving of phylogenetic trees and associated data. Such attention to practices that promote sharing of data reflects rapidly improving information technology, and rapidly expanding potential to use this technology to aggregate and link data from previously published research. Nevertheless, little is known about current practices, or best practices, for publishing trees and associated data so as to promote re-use. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 49 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 Kingdom | 12 | 24% |
United States | 8 | 16% |
France | 2 | 4% |
Canada | 2 | 4% |
Thailand | 1 | 2% |
Switzerland | 1 | 2% |
Belgium | 1 | 2% |
Israel | 1 | 2% |
Hong Kong | 1 | 2% |
Other | 2 | 4% |
Unknown | 18 | 37% |
Demographic breakdown
Type | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Members of the public | 27 | 55% |
Scientists | 18 | 37% |
Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 3 | 6% |
Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 2% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 135 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
United States | 12 | 9% |
Brazil | 4 | 3% |
United Kingdom | 4 | 3% |
Germany | 3 | 2% |
Australia | 2 | 1% |
Hong Kong | 1 | <1% |
Uruguay | 1 | <1% |
Norway | 1 | <1% |
Spain | 1 | <1% |
Other | 1 | <1% |
Unknown | 105 | 78% |
Demographic breakdown
Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Researcher | 35 | 26% |
Student > Ph. D. Student | 26 | 19% |
Student > Master | 22 | 16% |
Professor > Associate Professor | 8 | 6% |
Other | 7 | 5% |
Other | 27 | 20% |
Unknown | 10 | 7% |
Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 74 | 55% |
Computer Science | 13 | 10% |
Environmental Science | 8 | 6% |
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 6 | 4% |
Social Sciences | 6 | 4% |
Other | 13 | 10% |
Unknown | 15 | 11% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 79. 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 10 July 2020.
All research outputs
#542,673
of 25,517,918 outputs
Outputs from BMC Research Notes
#42
of 4,521 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#2,883
of 200,779 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Research Notes
#3
of 82 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,517,918 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,521 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.2. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% 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 200,779 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 82 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 97% of its contemporaries.