↓ Skip to main content

The past, present and future of Scientific discourse

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Cheminformatics, October 2011
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (93rd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (76th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
2 blogs
twitter
6 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
8 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
32 Mendeley
citeulike
5 CiteULike
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
The past, present and future of Scientific discourse
Published in
Journal of Cheminformatics, October 2011
DOI 10.1186/1758-2946-3-46
Pubmed ID
Authors

Henry S Rzepa

Abstract

The science journal is 346 years old in 2011, having evolved continuously but largely incrementally over that period. Its reinvention for an online presence has largely preserved its previously printed nature, in the sense that much of the increased functionality which is potentially offered by this new medium has yet to be exploited. In the present article an attempt is made to discuss two previously published papers, one in 1953 and the other in 2010, and to illustrate how additional functionality can be implemented in the form of accessible data sourced from quantum mechanical calculation and how subsequent discourse in the form of blogs may add to the process. In this sense, the reader of this article is invited to try for themselves whether these enhancements improve their scientific understanding, and whether such enhanced journals are good models for the future evolution of the genre.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 32 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Mexico 1 3%
Russia 1 3%
Brazil 1 3%
Unknown 29 91%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 7 22%
Student > Master 6 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 16%
Researcher 5 16%
Professor > Associate Professor 4 13%
Other 3 9%
Unknown 2 6%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 10 31%
Chemistry 7 22%
Engineering 3 9%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 6%
Linguistics 1 3%
Other 4 13%
Unknown 5 16%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 18. 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 10 December 2023.
All research outputs
#1,977,963
of 24,975,223 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Cheminformatics
#163
of 936 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#9,409
of 141,233 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Cheminformatics
#6
of 21 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,975,223 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 936 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 done well, scoring higher than 82% 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 141,233 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 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 21 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.