↓ Skip to main content

LitDB - Keeping Track of Research Papers From Your Institute Made Simple

Overview of attention for article published in Source Code for Biology and Medicine, March 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Readers on

mendeley
32 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
LitDB - Keeping Track of Research Papers From Your Institute Made Simple
Published in
Source Code for Biology and Medicine, March 2017
DOI 10.1186/s13029-017-0065-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jörn Bethune, Lars Kraemer, Ingo Thomsen, Andreas Keller, David Ellinghaus, Andre Franke

Abstract

In science peer-reviewed publications serve as an important indicator of scientific excellence and productivity. Therefore, every scientist and institution must carefully maintain and update records of their scientific publications. However, in most institutions and universities articles are often managed in a redundant file-based and non-central way. Whereas excellent reference management software packages such as Zotero, Endnote or Mendeley exist to manage bibliographies and references when writing scientific articles, we are not aware of any open source database solution keeping track of publication records from large scientific groups, entire institutions and/or universities. We here describe LitDB, a novel open source literature database solution for easy maintenance of publication lists assigned to various topics. In the last 2 years more than 50 users have been using LitDB at our research institute. The LitDB system is accessed via a web browser. Publications can be uploaded through direct exports from reference manager libraries or by entering PubMed IDs. Single users or user groups can track their citation counts, h-index and impact factor statistics and gain insights into the publication records of other users. It offers various visualization functions like coauthor networks and provides ways to organize publications from dedicated projects and user groups. The latter is in particular beneficial to manage publication lists of large research groups and research initiatives through a "crowd-sourcing" effort. Keeping track of papers authored and published by a research group, institute or university is an important and non-trivial task. By using a centralized web-based platform for publication management such as LitDB the compilation of project- and group-related publication lists becomes easily manageable and it is less likely that papers are forgotten along the way.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 32 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 32 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 7 22%
Librarian 6 19%
Student > Bachelor 4 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 6%
Other 5 16%
Unknown 5 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 6 19%
Social Sciences 4 13%
Psychology 3 9%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 9%
Engineering 2 6%
Other 7 22%
Unknown 7 22%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 28 March 2017.
All research outputs
#14,490,397
of 24,312,464 outputs
Outputs from Source Code for Biology and Medicine
#68
of 127 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#163,994
of 313,017 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Source Code for Biology and Medicine
#3
of 3 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,312,464 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 127 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.1. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 313,017 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.