↓ Skip to main content

Erratum: Should development of Alzheimer’s disease-specific intravenous immunoglobulin be considered?

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Neuroinflammation, April 2015
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 (78th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (62nd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet

Citations

dimensions_citation
1 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
1 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
Erratum: Should development of Alzheimer’s disease-specific intravenous immunoglobulin be considered?
Published in
Journal of Neuroinflammation, April 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12974-015-0290-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

David A Loeffler

Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 24 April 2015.
All research outputs
#4,173,376
of 22,800,560 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Neuroinflammation
#802
of 2,629 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#53,382
of 264,945 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Neuroinflammation
#18
of 51 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,800,560 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 80th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,629 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.6. 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 264,945 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 78% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 51 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 62% of its contemporaries.