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 |
Non-Traditional Risk Factors are Important Contributors to the Racial Disparity in Diabetes Risk: The Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities Study
|
---|---|
Published in |
Journal of General Internal Medicine, August 2013
|
DOI | 10.1007/s11606-013-2569-z |
Pubmed ID | |
Authors |
Ranee Chatterjee, Frederick L. Brancati, Tariq Shafi, David Edelman, James S. Pankow, Thomas H. Mosley, Elizabeth Selvin, Hsin Chieh Yeh |
Abstract |
Traditional risk factors, particularly obesity, do not completely explain the excess risk of diabetes among African Americans compared to whites. |
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 % |
---|---|---|
United States | 1 | 50% |
Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
Type | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 50% |
Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 50 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Unknown | 50 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Student > Ph. D. Student | 11 | 22% |
Researcher | 5 | 10% |
Professor > Associate Professor | 5 | 10% |
Student > Bachelor | 5 | 10% |
Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 8% |
Other | 14 | 28% |
Unknown | 6 | 12% |
Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Medicine and Dentistry | 15 | 30% |
Social Sciences | 5 | 10% |
Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 5 | 10% |
Nursing and Health Professions | 4 | 8% |
Computer Science | 2 | 4% |
Other | 6 | 12% |
Unknown | 13 | 26% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 29. 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 20 February 2014.
All research outputs
#1,235,451
of 23,911,072 outputs
Outputs from Journal of General Internal Medicine
#1,014
of 7,806 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#10,788
of 200,281 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of General Internal Medicine
#17
of 65 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,911,072 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,806 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 21.8. 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 200,281 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 65 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its contemporaries.