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 |
Biobanks and scientists: supply and demand
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Translational Medicine, May 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12967-018-1505-8 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Angelo Virgilio Paradiso, Maria Grazia Daidone, Vincenzo Canzonieri, Alfredo Zito |
| Abstract |
The biobanks, providers of biospecimens, and the scientists, users of biological material, are both strategic actors in translational medicine but the communication about those two subjects seems to be delicate. Recently, biobank managers from US and Europe stressed the danger of underuse of biospecimens stored in their biobanks thus stimulating the debate about innovative ways to collect samples and to communicate their availability. We hypothesize that the already stored collections meet the interest of present scientists only in specific situations. Serial biospecimens from patients with large associated clinical data concerning voluptuary habits, environmental exposure, anthropomorphic information are needed to meet the even more specific projects the scientists are planning. The hypothesis of activation of specific sections in ranked journals aimed to facilitate the communication between partners interested in finding/collecting ad hoc biospecimens is discussed. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 31 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 31 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 13% |
| Researcher | 4 | 13% |
| Other | 3 | 10% |
| Professor | 2 | 6% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 4 | 13% |
| Unknown | 12 | 39% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 6 | 19% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 4 | 13% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 13% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 2 | 6% |
| Social Sciences | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 14 | 45% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 23 May 2018.
All research outputs
#18,171,423
of 23,344,526 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Translational Medicine
#2,812
of 4,117 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#239,953
of 330,848 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Translational Medicine
#42
of 99 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,344,526 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,117 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.6. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 330,848 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 99 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 51% of its contemporaries.