↓ Skip to main content

Bacterial water quality: Springs and streams in the Great Smoky Mountains National Park

Overview of attention for article published in Environmental Management, July 1982
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (75th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog

Citations

dimensions_citation
5 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
5 Mendeley
Title
Bacterial water quality: Springs and streams in the Great Smoky Mountains National Park
Published in
Environmental Management, July 1982
DOI 10.1007/bf01875067
Authors

David G. Silsbee, Gary L. Larson

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 5 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 5 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 40%
Professor 1 20%
Researcher 1 20%
Other 1 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Sports and Recreations 2 40%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 20%
Environmental Science 1 20%
Unknown 1 20%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 February 2018.
All research outputs
#6,760,834
of 25,394,764 outputs
Outputs from Environmental Management
#571
of 1,914 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#1,735
of 7,125 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Environmental Management
#3
of 3 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,394,764 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,914 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% 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 7,125 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 75% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.