| Title |
Rapid establishment of a COVID-19 perinatal biorepository: early lessons from the first 100 women enrolled
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Medical Research Methodology, August 2020
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12874-020-01102-y |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Lydia L. Shook, Jessica E. Shui, Adeline A. Boatin, Samantha Devane, Natalie Croul, Lael M. Yonker, Juan D. Matute, Rosiane S. Lima, Muriel Schwinn, Dana Cvrk, Laurel Gardner, Robin Azevedo, Suzanne Stanton, Evan A. Bordt, Laura J. Yockey, Alessio Fasano, Jonathan Z. Li, Xu G. Yu, Anjali J. Kaimal, Paul H. Lerou, Andrea G. Edlow |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 12 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 6 | 50% |
| Singapore | 1 | 8% |
| Unknown | 5 | 42% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 7 | 58% |
| Scientists | 4 | 33% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 8% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 175 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 175 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 27 | 15% |
| Student > Master | 22 | 13% |
| Researcher | 14 | 8% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 14 | 8% |
| Other | 11 | 6% |
| Other | 29 | 17% |
| Unknown | 58 | 33% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 41 | 23% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 27 | 15% |
| Psychology | 11 | 6% |
| Social Sciences | 7 | 4% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 2% |
| Other | 17 | 10% |
| Unknown | 69 | 39% |
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 05 September 2020.
All research outputs
#4,700,974
of 23,379,207 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Research Methodology
#751
of 2,060 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#112,664
of 400,267 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Research Methodology
#24
of 44 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,379,207 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 2,060 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 63% 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 400,267 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 71% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 44 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.