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
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
科学的根拠に基づく筋肉内注射の注射針刺入深度に関する研究
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Japanese Journal of Nursing Art and Science, August 2016
|
| DOI | 10.18892/jsnas.8.1_66 |
| Authors |
菊池 和子, 高橋 有里, 小山 奈都子, 石田 陽子 |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Japan | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 2 | 67% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 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 11 March 2021.
All research outputs
#15,094,202
of 25,852,155 outputs
Outputs from Japanese Journal of Nursing Art and Science
#9
of 27 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#191,069
of 353,128 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Japanese Journal of Nursing Art and Science
#3
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,852,155 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 27 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.6. This one scored the same or higher as 18 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 353,128 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 6 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 3 of them.