| Title |
Environmental evidence in action: on the science and practice of evidence synthesis and evidence-based decision-making
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Environmental Evidence, May 2023
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13750-023-00302-5 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Steven J. Cooke, Carly N. Cook, Vivian M. Nguyen, Jessica C. Walsh, Nathan Young, Christopher Cvitanovic, Matthew J. Grainger, Nicola P. Randall, Matt Muir, Andrew N. Kadykalo, Kathryn A. Monk, Andrew S. Pullin |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 33 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 8 | 24% |
| Canada | 5 | 15% |
| Australia | 2 | 6% |
| Nigeria | 1 | 3% |
| United States | 1 | 3% |
| Ireland | 1 | 3% |
| Netherlands | 1 | 3% |
| Norway | 1 | 3% |
| Mexico | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 12 | 36% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 16 | 48% |
| Scientists | 14 | 42% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 3 | 9% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 35 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 35 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unspecified | 5 | 14% |
| Student > Master | 4 | 11% |
| Researcher | 3 | 9% |
| Other | 2 | 6% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 5 | 14% |
| Unknown | 14 | 40% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unspecified | 5 | 14% |
| Environmental Science | 5 | 14% |
| Social Sciences | 3 | 9% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 1 | 3% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 7 | 20% |
| Unknown | 13 | 37% |
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 22 June 2023.
All research outputs
#1,964,104
of 25,026,088 outputs
Outputs from Environmental Evidence
#80
of 327 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#37,127
of 375,665 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Environmental Evidence
#4
of 7 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,026,088 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 327 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% 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 375,665 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 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 7 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 3 of them.