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 |
How to optimize the benefits of computer assisted sperm analysis in experimental toxicology
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Occupational Medicine and Toxicology, March 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1745-6673-8-6 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Carsten Schleh, Anne-Laure Leoni |
| Abstract |
Exposure at the working place to various substances, that may affect semen quality is possible and should be investigated in detail. One appropriate method for this is computer-assisted sperm analysis (CASA) which offers multiple benefits in comparison to manual evaluation. However, several pitfalls exist, which make the evaluation of data obtained from CASA difficult to interpret. In the present commentary, we focus on these problems, show some examples, and try to define minimum standards which should be taken into consideration whenever working with computer-assisted sperm analysis. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 3 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 61 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Malaysia | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 60 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 12 | 20% |
| Student > Bachelor | 12 | 20% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 7 | 11% |
| Researcher | 5 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 7% |
| Other | 11 | 18% |
| Unknown | 10 | 16% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 18 | 30% |
| Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine | 11 | 18% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 7 | 11% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 5% |
| Unspecified | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 10 | 16% |
| Unknown | 10 | 16% |
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 13 March 2013.
All research outputs
#15,168,964
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Occupational Medicine and Toxicology
#191
of 419 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#116,687
of 208,569 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Occupational Medicine and Toxicology
#4
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 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 419 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% 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 208,569 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
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.