↓ Skip to main content

An updated review of the fish faunas from the Crato and Santana formations in Brazil, a close relationship to the Tethys fauna

Overview of attention for article published in Bulletin of the Kitakyushu Museum of Natural History and Human History, Series A (Natural History), May 2021
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (56th percentile)

Mentioned by

wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
36 Dimensions
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
An updated review of the fish faunas from the Crato and Santana formations in Brazil, a close relationship to the Tethys fauna
Published in
Bulletin of the Kitakyushu Museum of Natural History and Human History, Series A (Natural History), May 2021
DOI 10.34522/kmnh.9.0_107
Authors

Paulo M. Brito, Yoshitaka Yabumoto

Attention Score in Context

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 08 March 2024.
All research outputs
#8,731,930
of 25,852,155 outputs
Outputs from Bulletin of the Kitakyushu Museum of Natural History and Human History, Series A (Natural History)
#3
of 11 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#181,659
of 456,584 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Bulletin of the Kitakyushu Museum of Natural History and Human History, Series A (Natural History)
#1
of 2 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 11 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.9. This one scored the same or higher as 8 of them.
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 456,584 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 56% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 2 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them