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 |
Let’s get honest about sampling
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Perspectives in Drug Discovery and Design, November 2011
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10822-011-9497-y |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
David L. Mobley |
| Abstract |
Molecular simulations see widespread and increasing use in computation and molecular design, especially within the area of molecular simulations applied to biomolecular binding and interactions, our focus here. However, force field accuracy remains a concern for many practitioners, and it is often not clear what level of accuracy is really needed for payoffs in a discovery setting. Here, I argue that despite limitations of today's force fields, current simulation tools and force fields now provide the potential for real benefits in a variety of applications. However, these same tools also provide irreproducible results which are often poorly interpreted. Continued progress in the field requires more honesty in assessment and care in evaluation of simulation results, especially with respect to convergence. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 3 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 2 | 67% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 136 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 8 | 6% |
| Germany | 3 | 2% |
| Portugal | 2 | 1% |
| United Kingdom | 2 | 1% |
| Norway | 1 | <1% |
| Bulgaria | 1 | <1% |
| Sweden | 1 | <1% |
| Colombia | 1 | <1% |
| France | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 3 | 2% |
| Unknown | 113 | 83% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 43 | 32% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 35 | 26% |
| Student > Master | 11 | 8% |
| Student > Bachelor | 9 | 7% |
| Professor | 7 | 5% |
| Other | 24 | 18% |
| Unknown | 7 | 5% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Chemistry | 56 | 41% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 24 | 18% |
| Physics and Astronomy | 12 | 9% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 8 | 6% |
| Computer Science | 8 | 6% |
| Other | 17 | 13% |
| Unknown | 11 | 8% |
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 10 April 2014.
All research outputs
#14,841,711
of 25,457,858 outputs
Outputs from Perspectives in Drug Discovery and Design
#673
of 949 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#154,504
of 245,752 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Perspectives in Drug Discovery and Design
#18
of 21 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,457,858 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 949 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.3. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% 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 245,752 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 21 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.