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 |
An ethnobotanical survey of medicinal plants used in the eastern highlands of Papua New Guinea
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine, December 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1746-4269-8-47 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Ronald Y Jorim, Seva Korape, Wauwa Legu, Michael Koch, Louis R Barrows, Teatulohi K Matainaho, Prem P Rai |
| Abstract |
The Eastern Highlands area of Papua New Guinea (PNG) has a rich tradition of medicinal plant use. However, rapid modernization is resulting in the loss of independent language traditions and consequently a loss of individuals knowledgeable in medicinal plant use. This report represents a program to document and preserve traditional knowledge concerning medicinal plant use in PNG. This report documents and compares traditional plant use in the Eastern Highlands districts of Unggai-Bena, Okapa, and Obura-Wonenara, and puts these new records in context of previously documented PNG medicinal plant use. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 | 1 | 33% |
| Germany | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 1 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 67% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 140 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Philippines | 1 | <1% |
| China | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 137 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 23 | 16% |
| Student > Bachelor | 21 | 15% |
| Researcher | 20 | 14% |
| Student > Master | 17 | 12% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 9 | 6% |
| Other | 22 | 16% |
| Unknown | 28 | 20% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 42 | 30% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 22 | 16% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 6 | 4% |
| Social Sciences | 6 | 4% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 6 | 4% |
| Other | 26 | 19% |
| Unknown | 32 | 23% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 21 December 2012.
All research outputs
#13,677,179
of 22,689,790 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine
#445
of 731 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#161,836
of 280,030 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine
#11
of 17 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,689,790 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 731 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.7. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 280,030 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 17 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.