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 |
Sexism in academia is bad for science and a waste of public funding
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Nature Reviews Materials, November 2023
|
| DOI | 10.1038/s41578-023-00624-3 |
| Authors |
Nicole Boivin, Susanne Täuber, Ulrike Beisiegel, Ursula Keller, Janet G. Hering |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 1,550 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 223 | 14% |
| United Kingdom | 155 | 10% |
| Spain | 74 | 5% |
| Germany | 64 | 4% |
| Canada | 47 | 3% |
| France | 42 | 3% |
| Australia | 33 | 2% |
| Ireland | 26 | 2% |
| Switzerland | 23 | 1% |
| Other | 222 | 14% |
| Unknown | 641 | 41% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 846 | 55% |
| Scientists | 633 | 41% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 36 | 2% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 35 | 2% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 52 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 52 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 11 | 21% |
| Researcher | 10 | 19% |
| Student > Master | 6 | 12% |
| Other | 4 | 8% |
| Professor | 4 | 8% |
| Other | 10 | 19% |
| Unknown | 7 | 13% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 8 | 15% |
| Earth and Planetary Sciences | 5 | 10% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 4 | 8% |
| Social Sciences | 4 | 8% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 4 | 8% |
| Other | 18 | 35% |
| Unknown | 9 | 17% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 930. 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 May 2024.
All research outputs
#18,715
of 25,927,633 outputs
Outputs from Nature Reviews Materials
#2
of 846 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#383
of 374,081 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nature Reviews Materials
#1
of 33 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,927,633 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 846 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 26.1. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% 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 374,081 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 33 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 96% of its contemporaries.