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 |
An integrated pan‐tropical biomass map using multiple reference datasets
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Global Change Biology, January 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1111/gcb.13139 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Valerio Avitabile, Martin Herold, Gerard B M Heuvelink, Simon L Lewis, Oliver L Phillips, Gregory P Asner, John Armston, Peter S Ashton, Lindsay Banin, Nicolas Bayol, Nicholas J Berry, Pascal Boeckx, Bernardus H J de Jong, Ben DeVries, Cecile A J Girardin, Elizabeth Kearsley, Jeremy A Lindsell, Gabriela Lopez-Gonzalez, Richard Lucas, Yadvinder Malhi, Alexandra Morel, Edward T A Mitchard, Laszlo Nagy, Lan Qie, Marcela J Quinones, Casey M Ryan, Slik J W Ferry, Terry Sunderland, Gaia Vaglio Laurin, Roberto Cazzolla Gatti, Riccardo Valentini, Hans Verbeeck, Arief Wijaya, Simon Willcock |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 68 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 | 16 | 24% |
| United Kingdom | 15 | 22% |
| Germany | 3 | 4% |
| Australia | 3 | 4% |
| New Zealand | 2 | 3% |
| South Africa | 1 | 1% |
| Canada | 1 | 1% |
| India | 1 | 1% |
| Mexico | 1 | 1% |
| Other | 4 | 6% |
| Unknown | 21 | 31% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 44 | 65% |
| Scientists | 23 | 34% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 1% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 953 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Germany | 3 | <1% |
| Brazil | 3 | <1% |
| Italy | 2 | <1% |
| United States | 2 | <1% |
| Japan | 2 | <1% |
| France | 1 | <1% |
| Austria | 1 | <1% |
| Sweden | 1 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 5 | <1% |
| Unknown | 932 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 225 | 24% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 145 | 15% |
| Student > Master | 130 | 14% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 67 | 7% |
| Student > Bachelor | 51 | 5% |
| Other | 163 | 17% |
| Unknown | 172 | 18% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Environmental Science | 345 | 36% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 162 | 17% |
| Earth and Planetary Sciences | 115 | 12% |
| Engineering | 23 | 2% |
| Social Sciences | 12 | 1% |
| Other | 77 | 8% |
| Unknown | 219 | 23% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 78. 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 01 June 2021.
All research outputs
#558,712
of 25,837,817 outputs
Outputs from Global Change Biology
#669
of 6,560 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#9,730
of 404,281 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Global Change Biology
#9
of 86 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,837,817 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,560 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 35.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% 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 404,281 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 86 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.