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 |
Ten Simple Rules of Live Tweeting at Scientific Conferences
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
PLoS Computational Biology, August 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1003789 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Sean Ekins, Ethan O. Perlstein |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2,313 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 | 653 | 28% |
| United Kingdom | 251 | 11% |
| Canada | 142 | 6% |
| Australia | 119 | 5% |
| Spain | 60 | 3% |
| Germany | 34 | 1% |
| Netherlands | 30 | 1% |
| France | 25 | 1% |
| Ireland | 19 | <1% |
| Other | 278 | 12% |
| Unknown | 702 | 30% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1272 | 55% |
| Scientists | 624 | 27% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 302 | 13% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 112 | 5% |
| Unknown | 3 | <1% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 174 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 7 | 4% |
| Netherlands | 3 | 2% |
| Spain | 2 | 1% |
| Finland | 2 | 1% |
| Portugal | 1 | <1% |
| France | 1 | <1% |
| Sweden | 1 | <1% |
| Korea, Republic of | 1 | <1% |
| Germany | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 4 | 2% |
| Unknown | 151 | 87% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 34 | 20% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 30 | 17% |
| Student > Master | 16 | 9% |
| Other | 14 | 8% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 13 | 7% |
| Other | 32 | 18% |
| Unknown | 35 | 20% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 37 | 21% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 22 | 13% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 11 | 6% |
| Psychology | 8 | 5% |
| Social Sciences | 7 | 4% |
| Other | 40 | 23% |
| Unknown | 49 | 28% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1591. 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 16 September 2022.
All research outputs
#7,225
of 25,891,484 outputs
Outputs from PLoS Computational Biology
#4
of 9,065 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#31
of 248,755 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLoS Computational Biology
#1
of 159 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,891,484 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 9,065 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.4. 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 248,755 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 159 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.