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 |
On the Futility of Screening for Genes That Make You Fat
|
---|---|
Published in |
PLOS Medicine, November 2011
|
DOI | 10.1371/journal.pmed.1001114 |
Pubmed ID | |
Authors |
J. Lennert Veerman |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 49 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 | 3 | 6% |
United Kingdom | 2 | 4% |
Spain | 2 | 4% |
Sweden | 1 | 2% |
Norway | 1 | 2% |
New Zealand | 1 | 2% |
Australia | 1 | 2% |
Unknown | 38 | 78% |
Demographic breakdown
Type | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Members of the public | 41 | 84% |
Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 5 | 10% |
Scientists | 3 | 6% |
Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 2% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 35 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
United Kingdom | 1 | 3% |
Mexico | 1 | 3% |
United States | 1 | 3% |
Unknown | 32 | 91% |
Demographic breakdown
Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Researcher | 5 | 14% |
Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 11% |
Student > Master | 4 | 11% |
Student > Bachelor | 3 | 9% |
Other | 3 | 9% |
Other | 7 | 20% |
Unknown | 9 | 26% |
Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Medicine and Dentistry | 11 | 31% |
Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 5 | 14% |
Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 9% |
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 6% |
Psychology | 2 | 6% |
Other | 3 | 9% |
Unknown | 9 | 26% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 41. 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 19 February 2019.
All research outputs
#995,098
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from PLOS Medicine
#1,507
of 5,162 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#4,176
of 153,810 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS Medicine
#10
of 58 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,162 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 77.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% 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 153,810 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 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 58 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.