↓ Skip to main content

Anatomy of open access publishing: a study of longitudinal development and internal structure

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medicine, October 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (98th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
4 news outlets
blogs
25 blogs
policy
2 policy sources
twitter
291 tweeters
facebook
22 Facebook pages
wikipedia
8 Wikipedia pages
googleplus
13 Google+ users
reddit
1 Redditor

Citations

dimensions_citation
211 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
337 Mendeley
citeulike
17 CiteULike
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
Anatomy of open access publishing: a study of longitudinal development and internal structure
Published in
BMC Medicine, October 2012
DOI 10.1186/1741-7015-10-124
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mikael Laakso, Bo-Christer Björk

Abstract

Open access (OA) is a revolutionary way of providing access to the scholarly journal literature made possible by the Internet. The primary aim of this study was to measure the volume of scientific articles published in full immediate OA journals from 2000 to 2011, while observing longitudinal internal shifts in the structure of OA publishing concerning revenue models, publisher types and relative distribution among scientific disciplines. The secondary aim was to measure the share of OA articles of all journal articles, including articles made OA by publishers with a delay and individual author-paid OA articles in subscription journals (hybrid OA), as these subsets of OA publishing have mostly been ignored in previous studies.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 291 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 337 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 17 5%
Germany 7 2%
Netherlands 6 2%
Spain 6 2%
Canada 5 1%
United Kingdom 5 1%
Switzerland 4 1%
Brazil 4 1%
Croatia 3 <1%
Other 27 8%
Unknown 253 75%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Librarian 79 23%
Researcher 51 15%
Student > Master 39 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 34 10%
Other 31 9%
Other 90 27%
Unknown 13 4%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 105 31%
Computer Science 57 17%
Arts and Humanities 29 9%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 28 8%
Medicine and Dentistry 27 8%
Other 64 19%
Unknown 27 8%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 415. 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 27 July 2021.
All research outputs
#55,971
of 22,509,254 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medicine
#61
of 3,372 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#250
of 179,055 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medicine
#3
of 171 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,509,254 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 3,372 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 42.4. 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 179,055 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 171 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 98% of its contemporaries.