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 |
Bias in species range estimates from minimum convex polygons: implications for conservation and options for improved planning
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Animal Conservation, February 2006
|
| DOI | 10.1017/s1367943003003044 |
| Authors |
Mark A. Burgman, Julian C. Fox |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 880 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 17 | 2% |
| Brazil | 11 | 1% |
| United Kingdom | 9 | 1% |
| Germany | 7 | <1% |
| Argentina | 4 | <1% |
| Canada | 4 | <1% |
| Switzerland | 3 | <1% |
| South Africa | 3 | <1% |
| France | 2 | <1% |
| Other | 17 | 2% |
| Unknown | 803 | 91% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 188 | 21% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 185 | 21% |
| Student > Master | 152 | 17% |
| Student > Bachelor | 85 | 10% |
| Other | 38 | 4% |
| Other | 125 | 14% |
| Unknown | 107 | 12% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 485 | 55% |
| Environmental Science | 190 | 22% |
| Earth and Planetary Sciences | 24 | 3% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 19 | 2% |
| Social Sciences | 10 | 1% |
| Other | 30 | 3% |
| Unknown | 122 | 14% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 30 September 2020.
All research outputs
#3,722,734
of 26,017,215 outputs
Outputs from Animal Conservation
#497
of 1,336 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#9,220
of 94,950 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Animal Conservation
#33
of 149 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,017,215 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 85th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,336 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 19.8. 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 94,950 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 149 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.