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 |
Yearly Planning Meetings: Individualized Development Plans Aren’t Just More Paperwork
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Molecular Cell, June 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1016/j.molcel.2015.04.025 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Ben J. Vincent, Clarissa Scholes, Max V. Staller, Zeba Wunderlich, Javier Estrada, Jeehae Park, Meghan D.J. Bragdon, Francheska Lopez Rivera, Kelly M. Biette, Angela H. DePace |
| Abstract |
The National Institutes of Health (NIH) encourages trainees to make Individualized Development Plans to help them prepare for academic and nonacademic careers. We describe our approach to building an Individualized Development Plan, the reasons we find them useful and empowering for both PIs and trainees, and resources to help other labs implement them constructively. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 172 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 States | 76 | 44% |
| United Kingdom | 9 | 5% |
| Saudi Arabia | 4 | 2% |
| Canada | 3 | 2% |
| Germany | 3 | 2% |
| Australia | 2 | 1% |
| France | 2 | 1% |
| Puerto Rico | 1 | <1% |
| Ireland | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 7 | 4% |
| Unknown | 64 | 37% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 88 | 51% |
| Members of the public | 78 | 45% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 4 | 2% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 1% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 280 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | <1% |
| Germany | 2 | <1% |
| France | 1 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 274 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 64 | 23% |
| Researcher | 58 | 21% |
| Student > Bachelor | 23 | 8% |
| Other | 22 | 8% |
| Professor | 18 | 6% |
| Other | 69 | 25% |
| Unknown | 26 | 9% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 74 | 26% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 51 | 18% |
| Engineering | 24 | 9% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 17 | 6% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 13 | 5% |
| Other | 59 | 21% |
| Unknown | 42 | 15% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 120. 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 03 April 2023.
All research outputs
#354,232
of 25,718,113 outputs
Outputs from Molecular Cell
#164
of 7,686 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#3,730
of 282,138 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Molecular Cell
#4
of 103 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,718,113 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,686 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 19.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% 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 282,138 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 103 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.