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.
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
女子学生における非特異的慢性腰痛の有無による呼吸機能の違い
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Rigakuryoho Kagaku, January 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1589/rika.31.799 |
| Authors |
金子 秀雄, 木庭 知美, 徳永 理紗 |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 3 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 3 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 2 | 67% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 2 | 67% |
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 11 May 2019.
All research outputs
#8,535,472
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Rigakuryoho Kagaku
#22
of 291 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#127,391
of 399,677 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Rigakuryoho Kagaku
#1
of 25 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 291 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 1.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% 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 399,677 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 53% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 25 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.