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 |
Using the Value of Information to improve conservation decision making
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Biological Reviews, October 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1111/brv.12471 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Friederike C. Bolam, Matthew J. Grainger, Kerrie L. Mengersen, Gavin B. Stewart, William J. Sutherland, Michael C. Runge, Philip J. K. McGowan |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 39 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 Kingdom | 11 | 28% |
| Australia | 4 | 10% |
| United States | 3 | 8% |
| Romania | 1 | 3% |
| Denmark | 1 | 3% |
| Comoros | 1 | 3% |
| Poland | 1 | 3% |
| Norway | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 16 | 41% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 19 | 49% |
| Members of the public | 19 | 49% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 3% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 166 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 166 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 50 | 30% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 24 | 14% |
| Student > Master | 14 | 8% |
| Other | 13 | 8% |
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 4% |
| Other | 14 | 8% |
| Unknown | 45 | 27% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 46 | 28% |
| Environmental Science | 36 | 22% |
| Engineering | 11 | 7% |
| Social Sciences | 5 | 3% |
| Earth and Planetary Sciences | 5 | 3% |
| Other | 15 | 9% |
| Unknown | 48 | 29% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 27. 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 06 March 2023.
All research outputs
#1,470,357
of 25,727,480 outputs
Outputs from Biological Reviews
#376
of 1,594 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#30,836
of 356,676 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Biological Reviews
#6
of 19 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,727,480 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,594 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 30.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% 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 356,676 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 19 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% of its contemporaries.