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 |
Recommendations for the use of tree models to estimate national forest biomass and assess their uncertainty
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Annals of Forest Science , March 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s13595-015-0465-x |
| Authors |
Matieu Henry, Miguel Cifuentes Jara, Maxime Réjou-Méchain, Daniel Piotto, José María Michel Fuentes, Craig Wayson, Federico Alice Guier, Héctor Castañeda Lombis, Edwin Castellanos López, Ruby Cuenca Lara, Kelvin Cueva Rojas, Jhon Del Águila Pasquel, Álvaro Duque Montoya, Javier Fernández Vega, Abner Jiménez Galo, Omar R. López, Lars Gunnar Marklund, Fabián Milla, José de Jesús Návar Cahidez, Edgar Ortiz Malavassi, Johnny Pérez, Carla Ramírez Zea, Luis Rangel García, Rafael Rubilar Pons, Carlos Sanquetta, Charles Scott, James Westfall, Mauricio Zapata-Cuartas, Laurent Saint-André |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| France | 2 | 40% |
| Panama | 1 | 20% |
| Unknown | 2 | 40% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 60% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 2 | 40% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 149 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Colombia | 1 | <1% |
| Poland | 1 | <1% |
| China | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 145 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 28 | 19% |
| Student > Master | 20 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 17 | 11% |
| Other | 11 | 7% |
| Professor | 11 | 7% |
| Other | 43 | 29% |
| Unknown | 19 | 13% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 47 | 32% |
| Environmental Science | 43 | 29% |
| Earth and Planetary Sciences | 12 | 8% |
| Engineering | 6 | 4% |
| Social Sciences | 3 | 2% |
| Other | 10 | 7% |
| Unknown | 28 | 19% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 02 July 2015.
All research outputs
#14,660,010
of 25,461,852 outputs
Outputs from Annals of Forest Science
#800
of 944 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#131,828
of 277,931 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Annals of Forest Science
#15
of 24 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,461,852 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 944 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.6. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 277,931 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 24 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.