| Title |
Ethnicity Reporting Practices for Empirical Research in Three Autism-Related Journals
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, February 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10803-014-2041-x |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Nigel P. Pierce, Mark F. O’Reilly, Audrey M. Sorrells, Christina L. Fragale, Pamela J. White, Jeannie M. Aguilar, Heather A. Cole |
| Abstract |
This review examines ethnicity reporting in three autism-related journals (Autism, Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities, and Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders) over a 6-year period. A comprehensive multistep search of articles is used to identify ethnicity as a demographic variable in these three journals. Articles that identified research participants' ethnicity were further analyzed to determine the impact of ethnicity as a demographic variable on findings of each study. The results indicate that ethnicity has not been adequately reported in these three autism related journals even though previous recommendations have been made to improve inadequacies of descriptive information of research participants in autism research (Kistner and Robbins in J Autism Dev Disord 16:77-82, 1986). Implications for the field of autism spectrum disorders are discussed in addition to further recommendations for future research. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 5 | 56% |
| Spain | 2 | 22% |
| Unknown | 2 | 22% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 7 | 78% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 11% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 11% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 104 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Netherlands | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 103 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 22 | 21% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 21 | 20% |
| Student > Master | 16 | 15% |
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 6% |
| Researcher | 6 | 6% |
| Other | 11 | 11% |
| Unknown | 22 | 21% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 37 | 36% |
| Social Sciences | 16 | 15% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 5 | 5% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 4 | 4% |
| Arts and Humanities | 3 | 3% |
| Other | 9 | 9% |
| Unknown | 30 | 29% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 29 April 2016.
All research outputs
#5,477,764
of 25,654,806 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders
#2,085
of 5,484 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#61,301
of 324,015 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders
#23
of 53 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,654,806 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 78th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,484 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% 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 324,015 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 81% of its contemporaries.
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 has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 56% of its contemporaries.