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 |
Assessing user perspectives on clinical pharmacogenomics consultation documentation: a user-centered evaluation
|
---|---|
Published in |
Frontiers in Pharmacology, May 2024
|
DOI | 10.3389/fphar.2024.1377132 |
Pubmed ID | |
Authors |
Nina Desai, Namratha Ravindra, Bradley Hall, Hana Al Alshaykh, Lauren Lemke, Eda Eken, Emily J. Cicali, Kristin Wiisanen, Larisa H. Cavallari, Khoa A. Nguyen |
Mendeley readers
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Other | 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 14. 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 31 May 2024.
All research outputs
#2,572,932
of 26,018,952 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Pharmacology
#1,103
of 20,088 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#23,030
of 229,104 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Pharmacology
#4
of 157 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,018,952 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 20,088 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% 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 229,104 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 157 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.