↓ Skip to main content

Alternatives to animal testing for evaluating local irritations

Overview of attention for article published in Folia Pharmacologica Japonica, January 2005
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (63rd percentile)

Mentioned by

wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
1 Dimensions
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
Alternatives to animal testing for evaluating local irritations
Published in
Folia Pharmacologica Japonica, January 2005
DOI 10.1254/fpj.125.350
Pubmed ID
Authors

Yuko Okamoto

Attention Score in Context

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 19 May 2012.
All research outputs
#7,656,930
of 23,310,485 outputs
Outputs from Folia Pharmacologica Japonica
#197
of 798 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#36,552
of 141,136 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Folia Pharmacologica Japonica
#2
of 19 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,310,485 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 798 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.1. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% 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 141,136 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
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 63% of its contemporaries.