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 |
Honey bee sting pain index by body location
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
PeerJ, April 2014
|
| DOI | 10.7717/peerj.338 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Michael L. Smith |
| Abstract |
The Schmidt Sting Pain Index rates the painfulness of 78 Hymenoptera species, using the honey bee as a reference point. However, the question of how sting painfulness varies depending on body location remains unanswered. This study rated the painfulness of honey bee stings over 25 body locations in one subject (the author). Pain was rated on a 1-10 scale, relative to an internal standard, the forearm. In the single subject, pain ratings were consistent over three repetitions. Sting location was a significant predictor of the pain rating in a linear model (p < 0.0001, DF = 25, 94, F = 27.4). The three least painful locations were the skull, middle toe tip, and upper arm (all scoring a 2.3). The three most painful locations were the nostril, upper lip, and penis shaft (9.0, 8.7, and 7.3, respectively). This study provides an index of how the painfulness of a honey bee sting varies depending on body location. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 437 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 | 64 | 15% |
| United Kingdom | 62 | 14% |
| Spain | 28 | 6% |
| Japan | 13 | 3% |
| Germany | 8 | 2% |
| Sweden | 7 | 2% |
| Canada | 6 | 1% |
| Australia | 6 | 1% |
| South Africa | 5 | 1% |
| Other | 49 | 11% |
| Unknown | 189 | 43% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 347 | 79% |
| Scientists | 64 | 15% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 17 | 4% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 9 | 2% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 124 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Germany | 3 | 2% |
| United Kingdom | 3 | 2% |
| Switzerland | 1 | <1% |
| France | 1 | <1% |
| Brazil | 1 | <1% |
| Australia | 1 | <1% |
| Czechia | 1 | <1% |
| Luxembourg | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 112 | 90% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 30 | 24% |
| Researcher | 17 | 14% |
| Student > Master | 14 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 8 | 6% |
| Student > Bachelor | 8 | 6% |
| Other | 28 | 23% |
| Unknown | 19 | 15% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 41 | 33% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 11 | 9% |
| Psychology | 5 | 4% |
| Physics and Astronomy | 5 | 4% |
| Chemistry | 5 | 4% |
| Other | 32 | 26% |
| Unknown | 25 | 20% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 916. 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 26 April 2024.
All research outputs
#19,111
of 25,805,386 outputs
Outputs from PeerJ
#29
of 15,335 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#89
of 239,551 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PeerJ
#1
of 131 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,805,386 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 15,335 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 17.2. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% 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 239,551 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 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 131 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 99% of its contemporaries.