↓ Skip to main content

Chapel Hill bisphenol A expert panel consensus statement: Integration of mechanisms, effects in animals and potential to impact human health at current levels of exposure

Overview of attention for article published in Reproductive Toxicology, July 2007
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#31 of 1,684)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (80th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
6 news outlets
blogs
3 blogs
policy
4 policy sources
twitter
4 X users
facebook
4 Facebook pages
wikipedia
6 Wikipedia pages
video
2 YouTube creators

Citations

dimensions_citation
602 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
383 Mendeley
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.
Title
Chapel Hill bisphenol A expert panel consensus statement: Integration of mechanisms, effects in animals and potential to impact human health at current levels of exposure
Published in
Reproductive Toxicology, July 2007
DOI 10.1016/j.reprotox.2007.07.005
Pubmed ID
Authors

Frederick S. vom Saal, Benson T. Akingbemi, Scott M. Belcher, Linda S. Birnbaum, D. Andrew Crain, Marcus Eriksen, Francesca Farabollini, Louis J. Guillette, Russ Hauser, Jerrold J. Heindel, Shuk-Mei Ho, Patricia A. Hunt, Taisen Iguchi, Susan Jobling, Jun Kanno, Ruth A. Keri, Karen E. Knudsen, Hans Laufer, Gerald A. LeBlanc, Michele Marcus, John A. McLachlan, John Peterson Myers, Angel Nadal, Retha R. Newbold, Nicolas Olea, Gail S. Prins, Catherine A. Richter, Beverly S. Rubin, Carlos Sonnenschein, Ana M. Soto, Chris E. Talsness, John G. Vandenbergh, Laura N. Vandenberg, Debby R. Walser-Kuntz, Cheryl S. Watson, Wade V. Welshons, Yelena Wetherill, R. Thomas Zoeller

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 383 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 8 2%
United Kingdom 2 <1%
Pakistan 1 <1%
Finland 1 <1%
India 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Argentina 1 <1%
Switzerland 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Other 1 <1%
Unknown 365 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 64 17%
Student > Master 55 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 53 14%
Student > Bachelor 44 11%
Other 23 6%
Other 70 18%
Unknown 74 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 64 17%
Medicine and Dentistry 48 13%
Environmental Science 42 11%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 36 9%
Chemistry 24 6%
Other 76 20%
Unknown 93 24%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 86. 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 22 May 2023.
All research outputs
#496,194
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Reproductive Toxicology
#31
of 1,684 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#714
of 76,149 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Reproductive Toxicology
#2
of 10 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,684 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% 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 76,149 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 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 10 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 8 of them.