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 |
Considerations for higher efficiency and productivity in research activities
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BioData Mining, November 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13040-016-0115-3 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Diego A. Forero, Jason H. Moore |
| Abstract |
There are several factors that are known to affect research productivity; some of them imply the need for large financial investments and others are related to work styles. There are some articles that provide suggestions for early career scientists (PhD students and postdocs) but few publications are oriented to professors about scientific leadership. As academic mentoring might be useful at all levels of experience, in this note we suggest several key considerations for higher efficiency and productivity in academic and research activities. More research is needed into the main work style features that differentiate highly productive scientists and research groups, as some of them could be innate and others could be transferable. As funding agencies, universities and research centers invest large amounts of money in order to have a better scientific productivity, a deeper understanding of these factors will be of high academic and societal impact. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 28 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Colombia | 7 | 25% |
| Peru | 3 | 11% |
| Germany | 2 | 7% |
| United States | 2 | 7% |
| France | 2 | 7% |
| Chile | 1 | 4% |
| Ecuador | 1 | 4% |
| Mexico | 1 | 4% |
| Italy | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 8 | 29% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 14 | 50% |
| Scientists | 11 | 39% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 7% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 4% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 46 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Malaysia | 1 | 2% |
| Brazil | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 44 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 9 | 20% |
| Researcher | 6 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 11% |
| Librarian | 3 | 7% |
| Other | 3 | 7% |
| Other | 11 | 24% |
| Unknown | 9 | 20% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Social Sciences | 7 | 15% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 6 | 13% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 4 | 9% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 4 | 9% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 12 | 26% |
| Unknown | 11 | 24% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 17. 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 11 March 2021.
All research outputs
#2,022,637
of 24,032,151 outputs
Outputs from BioData Mining
#33
of 315 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#36,357
of 317,065 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BioData Mining
#2
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,032,151 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 315 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% 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 317,065 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 8 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 6 of them.