↓ Skip to main content

Science in support of the Deepwater Horizon response

Overview of attention for article published in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, December 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 (97th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (88th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
blogs
1 blog
policy
2 policy sources
twitter
27 X users
facebook
8 Facebook pages
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page
googleplus
2 Google+ users

Citations

dimensions_citation
119 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
198 Mendeley
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
Science in support of the Deepwater Horizon response
Published in
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, December 2012
DOI 10.1073/pnas.1204729109
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jane Lubchenco, Marcia K. McNutt, Gabrielle Dreyfus, Steven A. Murawski, David M. Kennedy, Paul T. Anastas, Steven Chu, Tom Hunter

Abstract

This introduction to the Special Feature presents the context for science during the Deepwater Horizon oil spill response, summarizes how scientific knowledge was integrated across disciplines and statutory responsibilities, identifies areas where scientific information was accurate and where it was not, and considers lessons learned and recommendations for future research and response. Scientific information was integrated within and across federal and state agencies, with input from nongovernmental scientists, across a diverse portfolio of needs--stopping the flow of oil, estimating the amount of oil, capturing and recovering the oil, tracking and forecasting surface oil, protecting coastal and oceanic wildlife and habitat, managing fisheries, and protecting the safety of seafood. Disciplines involved included atmospheric, oceanographic, biogeochemical, ecological, health, biological, and chemical sciences, physics, geology, and mechanical and chemical engineering. Platforms ranged from satellites and planes to ships, buoys, gliders, and remotely operated vehicles to laboratories and computer simulations. The unprecedented response effort depended directly on intense and extensive scientific and engineering data, information, and advice. Many valuable lessons were learned that should be applied to future events.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 27 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 198 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 6 3%
Mexico 2 1%
United Kingdom 2 1%
Germany 1 <1%
Norway 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Unknown 185 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 36 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 35 18%
Researcher 33 17%
Student > Bachelor 21 11%
Professor 13 7%
Other 27 14%
Unknown 33 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 42 21%
Environmental Science 42 21%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 22 11%
Engineering 17 9%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 3%
Other 29 15%
Unknown 40 20%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 50. 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 17 January 2020.
All research outputs
#857,612
of 25,998,826 outputs
Outputs from Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America
#13,709
of 104,359 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#6,276
of 292,638 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America
#99
of 889 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,998,826 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 104,359 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 39.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% 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 292,638 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 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 889 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.