The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 1 Mendeley reader of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
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 |
集団発生した腸管出血性大腸菌O157: H7の臨床的研究
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Iryo, October 2011
|
| DOI | 10.11261/iryo1946.51.346 |
| Authors |
市場 洋三 |
Mendeley readers
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 1 | 100% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 1 | 100% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 19 November 2019.
All research outputs
#8,731,423
of 25,852,155 outputs
Outputs from Iryo
#9
of 94 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#52,056
of 152,515 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Iryo
#2
of 22 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,852,155 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 94 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 1.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% 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 152,515 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 22 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.