↓ Skip to main content

A mutually beneficial collaboration between the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology Junior Members and Clinical and Translational Allergy

Overview of attention for article published in Clinical and Translational Allergy, December 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (74th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
9 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
3 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
14 Mendeley
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.
Title
A mutually beneficial collaboration between the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology Junior Members and Clinical and Translational Allergy
Published in
Clinical and Translational Allergy, December 2016
DOI 10.1186/s13601-016-0133-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Peter Valentin Tomazic, Anke Graessel, Diana Silva, Ibon Eguiluz-Gracia, George V. Guibas, Clive Grattan, Jean Bousquet, Olympia Tsilochristou

Abstract

The European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI) Junior Members (JM) comprise the largest EAACI section with around 4000 clinicians and scientists under 35 years of age working in the field of allergy and clinical immunology. The Junior Member collaboration with Clinical and Translational Allergy Journal is a mutually beneficial relationship providing Junior Members of EAACI with excellent opportunities to publish their work in the Journal, enhance their visibility in their respective field, and get involved with Journal-related activities and processes. In the future, this collaboration will grow, not only by the consolidation of these activities, but also by the implementation of new initiatives, such as a platform for discussing and/or publishing Junior Members' dissertations in the Journal. From the CTA perspective, the collaboration presents an opportunity to promote a new generation of allergists with experience of conducting and presenting research, with improved skills in critical review.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 14 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 14 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 2 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 14%
Student > Bachelor 1 7%
Professor 1 7%
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 7%
Other 2 14%
Unknown 5 36%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 2 14%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 7%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 7%
Social Sciences 1 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 7%
Other 2 14%
Unknown 6 43%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 25 April 2017.
All research outputs
#2,553,178
of 11,621,608 outputs
Outputs from Clinical and Translational Allergy
#167
of 346 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#82,477
of 324,546 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical and Translational Allergy
#7
of 14 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 11,621,608 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 77th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 346 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% 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 324,546 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 14 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 50% of its contemporaries.