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 |
マイクロピペットの操作方法が分注精度に与える影響と各施設における使用状況の調査
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Japanese Journal of Medical Technology, January 2018
|
| DOI | 10.14932/jamt.17-80 |
| Authors |
古川 聡子, 河口 勝憲, 岡崎 希美恵, 森永 睦子, 大久保 学, 辻岡 貴之, 通山 薫 |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 35 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Japan | 11 | 31% |
| Unknown | 24 | 69% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 32 | 91% |
| Scientists | 2 | 6% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 3% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 3 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 3 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 2 | 67% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 3 | 100% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 24. 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 29 January 2024.
All research outputs
#1,615,269
of 25,852,155 outputs
Outputs from Japanese Journal of Medical Technology
#5
of 121 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#36,794
of 453,021 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Japanese Journal of Medical Technology
#1
of 4 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,852,155 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 121 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% 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 453,021 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 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them