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
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Journeys through the Golgi—taking stock in a new era
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Cell Biology, November 2009
|
| DOI | 10.1083/jcb.200909011 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Scott Emr, Benjamin S. Glick, Adam D. Linstedt, Jennifer Lippincott-Schwartz, Alberto Luini, Vivek Malhotra, Brad J. Marsh, Akihiko Nakano, Suzanne R. Pfeffer, Catherine Rabouille, James E. Rothman, Graham Warren, Felix T. Wieland |
| Abstract |
The Golgi apparatus is essential for protein sorting and transport. Many researchers have long been fascinated with the form and function of this organelle. Yet, despite decades of scrutiny, the mechanisms by which proteins are transported across the Golgi remain controversial. At a recent meeting, many prominent Golgi researchers assembled to critically evaluate the core issues in the field. This report presents the outcome of their discussions and highlights the key open questions that will help guide the field into a new era. |
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% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 282 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 8 | 3% |
| Germany | 7 | 2% |
| Canada | 3 | 1% |
| United Kingdom | 3 | 1% |
| India | 2 | <1% |
| Norway | 1 | <1% |
| Czechia | 1 | <1% |
| Ireland | 1 | <1% |
| Chile | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 4 | 1% |
| Unknown | 251 | 89% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 85 | 30% |
| Researcher | 65 | 23% |
| Student > Bachelor | 27 | 10% |
| Student > Master | 25 | 9% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 15 | 5% |
| Other | 38 | 13% |
| Unknown | 27 | 10% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 159 | 56% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 50 | 18% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 10 | 4% |
| Physics and Astronomy | 7 | 2% |
| Chemistry | 7 | 2% |
| Other | 19 | 7% |
| Unknown | 30 | 11% |
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 15 July 2014.
All research outputs
#8,535,684
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Cell Biology
#6,175
of 11,939 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#38,358
of 108,089 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Cell Biology
#26
of 53 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 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 11,939 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.6. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 108,089 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 53 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.