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
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
嚥下調整食の炭酸強度や温度の違いによる誤嚥防止効果の定量的評価方法
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Transactions of Japanese Society for Medical and Biological Engineering, December 2019
|
| DOI | 10.11239/jsmbe.annual57.s90_1 |
| Authors |
可児 雅弥, 本橋 由香, 奥 知子, 山内 忍, 佐藤 敏夫, 阿岸 鉄三 |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 17 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 | 7 | 41% |
| Unknown | 10 | 59% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 15 | 88% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 6% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 6% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. 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 17 November 2022.
All research outputs
#2,785,139
of 25,578,098 outputs
Outputs from Transactions of Japanese Society for Medical and Biological Engineering
#2
of 167 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#64,933
of 478,733 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Transactions of Japanese Society for Medical and Biological Engineering
#2
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,578,098 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 167 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.3. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% 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 478,733 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 6 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 4 of them.