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 |
The e-Index, Complementing the h-Index for Excess Citations
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
PLOS ONE, May 2009
|
| DOI | 10.1371/journal.pone.0005429 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Chun-Ting Zhang |
| Abstract |
The h-index has already been used by major citation databases to evaluate the academic performance of individual scientists. Although effective and simple, the h-index suffers from some drawbacks that limit its use in accurately and fairly comparing the scientific output of different researchers. These drawbacks include information loss and low resolution: the former refers to the fact that in addition to h(2) citations for papers in the h-core, excess citations are completely ignored, whereas the latter means that it is common for a group of researchers to have an identical h-index. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 180 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 6 | 3% |
| Italy | 3 | 2% |
| Spain | 3 | 2% |
| Germany | 2 | 1% |
| Denmark | 2 | 1% |
| India | 2 | 1% |
| Norway | 1 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Mexico | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 5 | 3% |
| Unknown | 154 | 86% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 29 | 16% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 20 | 11% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 19 | 11% |
| Student > Master | 18 | 10% |
| Other | 15 | 8% |
| Other | 62 | 34% |
| Unknown | 17 | 9% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Computer Science | 36 | 20% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 26 | 14% |
| Social Sciences | 26 | 14% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 12 | 7% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 11 | 6% |
| Other | 48 | 27% |
| Unknown | 21 | 12% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 18. 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 November 2022.
All research outputs
#2,120,424
of 25,782,917 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#25,763
of 224,768 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#6,202
of 104,517 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#76
of 515 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,782,917 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 224,768 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% 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 104,517 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 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 515 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.