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 |
A pilot randomized controlled trial to promote healthful fish consumption during pregnancy: The Food for Thought Study
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Nutrition Journal, March 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1475-2891-12-33 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Emily Oken, Lauren B Guthrie, Arienne Bloomingdale, Deborah N Platek, Sarah Price, Jess Haines, Matthew W Gillman, Sjurdur F Olsen, David C Bellinger, Robert O Wright |
| Abstract |
Nutritionists advise pregnant women to eat fish to obtain adequate docosahexaenoic acid (DHA), an essential nutrient important for optimal brain development. However, concern exists that this advice will lead to excess intake of methylmercury, a developmental neurotoxicant. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 3 | 75% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 50% |
| Scientists | 1 | 25% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 104 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Spain | 1 | <1% |
| Australia | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 101 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 21 | 20% |
| Student > Master | 14 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 12 | 12% |
| Researcher | 11 | 11% |
| Other | 7 | 7% |
| Other | 20 | 19% |
| Unknown | 19 | 18% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 31 | 30% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 16 | 15% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 8 | 8% |
| Social Sciences | 6 | 6% |
| Psychology | 4 | 4% |
| Other | 12 | 12% |
| Unknown | 27 | 26% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 14. 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 30 April 2014.
All research outputs
#2,123,447
of 22,703,044 outputs
Outputs from Nutrition Journal
#509
of 1,423 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#18,342
of 196,095 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nutrition Journal
#12
of 33 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,703,044 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,423 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 36.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% 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 196,095 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 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 33 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% of its contemporaries.