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 |
Digital Atlasing and Standardization in the Mouse Brain
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
PLoS Computational Biology, February 2011
|
| DOI | 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1001065 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Michael Hawrylycz, Richard A. Baldock, Albert Burger, Tsutomu Hashikawa, G. Allan Johnson, Maryann Martone, Lydia Ng, Chris Lau, Stephen D. Larsen, Jonathan Nissanov, Luis Puelles, Seth Ruffins, Fons Verbeek, Ilya Zaslavsky, Jyl Boline |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 169 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 11 | 7% |
| Germany | 5 | 3% |
| Brazil | 2 | 1% |
| Netherlands | 2 | 1% |
| United Kingdom | 2 | 1% |
| Ireland | 1 | <1% |
| Sweden | 1 | <1% |
| France | 1 | <1% |
| Canada | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 6 | 4% |
| Unknown | 137 | 81% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 58 | 34% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 41 | 24% |
| Professor | 12 | 7% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 10 | 6% |
| Student > Bachelor | 9 | 5% |
| Other | 23 | 14% |
| Unknown | 16 | 9% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 63 | 37% |
| Neuroscience | 37 | 22% |
| Computer Science | 12 | 7% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 12 | 7% |
| Engineering | 8 | 5% |
| Other | 20 | 12% |
| Unknown | 17 | 10% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 14. 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 August 2015.
All research outputs
#2,642,426
of 25,576,801 outputs
Outputs from PLoS Computational Biology
#2,363
of 9,003 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#14,783
of 194,368 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLoS Computational Biology
#10
of 56 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,576,801 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 9,003 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% 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 194,368 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 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 56 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.