↓ Skip to main content

Joint position statement of the International Federation of Sports Medicine (FIMS) and European Federation of Sports Medicine Associations (EFSMA) on the IOC framework on fairness, inclusion and non-di…

Overview of attention for article published in BMJ Open Sport & Exercise Medicine, January 2022
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#31 of 774)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (98th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (96th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
4 news outlets
blogs
1 blog
twitter
150 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
1 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
26 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
Joint position statement of the International Federation of Sports Medicine (FIMS) and European Federation of Sports Medicine Associations (EFSMA) on the IOC framework on fairness, inclusion and non-discrimination based on gender identity and sex variations
Published in
BMJ Open Sport & Exercise Medicine, January 2022
DOI 10.1136/bmjsem-2021-001273
Pubmed ID
Authors

Fabio Pigozzi, Xavier Bigard, Juergen Steinacker, Bernd Wolfarth, Victoriya Badtieva, Christian Schneider, Jeroen Swart, James Lee John Bilzon, Demitri Constantinou, Michiko Dohi, Luigi Di Luigi, Chiara Fossati, Norbert Bachl, Guoping Li, Theodora Papadopoulou, Maurizio Casasco, Dina Christina (Christa) Janse van Rensburg, Jean-François Kaux, Sandra Rozenstoka, Jose-Antonio Casajus, Irina Zelenkova, Emre Ak, Bulent Ulkar, Francisco Arroyo, Anca Ionescu, André Pedrinelli, Mike Miller, Patrick Singleton, Malav Shroff, Nick Webborn, James Barrett, Blair Hamilton, Michael Geistlinger, Gianfranco Beltrami, Sergio Migliorini, Lenka Dienstbach-Wech, Stéphane Bermon, Yannis P Pitsiladis

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 150 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 26 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 26 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Lecturer 3 12%
Unspecified 2 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 8%
Researcher 2 8%
Student > Master 2 8%
Other 3 12%
Unknown 12 46%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 5 19%
Unspecified 2 8%
Psychology 2 8%
Linguistics 1 4%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 4%
Other 3 12%
Unknown 12 46%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 149. 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 September 2022.
All research outputs
#219,086
of 22,135,342 outputs
Outputs from BMJ Open Sport & Exercise Medicine
#31
of 774 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#6,468
of 417,551 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMJ Open Sport & Exercise Medicine
#2
of 32 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,135,342 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 774 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 28.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% 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 417,551 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 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 32 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 96% of its contemporaries.