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 |
Modeling Mechanisms of In Vivo Variability in Methotrexate Accumulation and Folate Pathway Inhibition in Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia Cells
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
PLoS Computational Biology, December 2010
|
| DOI | 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1001019 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
John C. Panetta, Alex Sparreboom, Ching-Hon Pui, Mary V. Relling, William E. Evans |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 70 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Korea, Republic of | 1 | 1% |
| Netherlands | 1 | 1% |
| Australia | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 67 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 14 | 20% |
| Researcher | 13 | 19% |
| Student > Master | 10 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 8 | 11% |
| Other | 7 | 10% |
| Other | 10 | 14% |
| Unknown | 8 | 11% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 26 | 37% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 11 | 16% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 9 | 13% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 5 | 7% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 4 | 6% |
| Other | 6 | 9% |
| Unknown | 9 | 13% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 13 July 2011.
All research outputs
#15,170,530
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from PLoS Computational Biology
#6,528
of 8,960 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#145,852
of 190,671 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLoS Computational Biology
#38
of 55 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,960 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.4. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 190,671 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 55 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.