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
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
臨床検査技師による鼻腔・咽頭からの検体採取への取り組み
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Japanese Journal of Medical Technology, July 2017
|
| DOI | 10.14932/jamt.17-3 |
| Authors |
中根 生弥, 高嶋 幹代, 青山 敦子 |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 30 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Japan | 8 | 27% |
| Unknown | 22 | 73% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 30 | 100% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 20. 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 25 May 2020.
All research outputs
#1,824,797
of 25,385,509 outputs
Outputs from Japanese Journal of Medical Technology
#6
of 121 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#34,761
of 326,890 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Japanese Journal of Medical Technology
#1
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,385,509 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 121 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% 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 326,890 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 12 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 91% of its contemporaries.