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.
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Dynamics of social network structure for Alzheimer and Lymphoma scientific communities
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Biology Direct, February 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13062-015-0040-2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Shahar Barbash |
| Abstract |
It is generally assumed that sociology affects scientific progress but specific examples of this assumption are hard to find. We examined this hypothesis by comparing the social network structure and its dynamics over the last 16 years, for two common human diseases; Alzheimer's disease, for which there has been very little therapeutic progress, and Lymphoma, were there has been significant therapeutic progress. We found that the Alzheimer's research community is more interlinked ('dense') and more 'cliquish' than that of Lymphoma and suggest that this could affect its scientific progress. This article was reviewed by Vladimir Kuznetsov and Anthony Almudevar. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 10 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 10 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 3 | 30% |
| Researcher | 2 | 20% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 1 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 1 | 10% |
| Unknown | 3 | 30% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 2 | 20% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 10% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 10% |
| Social Sciences | 1 | 10% |
| Psychology | 1 | 10% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 4 | 40% |
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
#4,835,465
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Biology Direct
#178
of 537 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#54,626
of 268,968 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Biology Direct
#4
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 79th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 537 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% 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 268,968 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 11 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.