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 for Writing a PLOS Ten Simple Rules Article
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
PLoS Computational Biology, October 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1003858 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Harriet Dashnow, Andrew Lonsdale, Philip E. Bourne |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 267 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 | 58 | 22% |
| United Kingdom | 33 | 12% |
| Australia | 22 | 8% |
| Canada | 10 | 4% |
| France | 5 | 2% |
| Germany | 5 | 2% |
| India | 4 | 1% |
| Spain | 4 | 1% |
| Sweden | 4 | 1% |
| Other | 37 | 14% |
| Unknown | 85 | 32% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 133 | 50% |
| Members of the public | 122 | 46% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 9 | 3% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | <1% |
| Unknown | 1 | <1% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 323 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 3 | <1% |
| Brazil | 3 | <1% |
| Portugal | 2 | <1% |
| Germany | 2 | <1% |
| France | 2 | <1% |
| United States | 2 | <1% |
| Australia | 2 | <1% |
| Japan | 2 | <1% |
| Hungary | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 11 | 3% |
| Unknown | 293 | 91% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 74 | 23% |
| Researcher | 57 | 18% |
| Student > Master | 29 | 9% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 23 | 7% |
| Student > Bachelor | 22 | 7% |
| Other | 66 | 20% |
| Unknown | 52 | 16% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 92 | 28% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 37 | 11% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 21 | 7% |
| Engineering | 15 | 5% |
| Psychology | 14 | 4% |
| Other | 76 | 24% |
| Unknown | 68 | 21% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 172. 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 01 February 2024.
All research outputs
#242,126
of 25,914,360 outputs
Outputs from PLoS Computational Biology
#157
of 9,071 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#2,248
of 274,621 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLoS Computational Biology
#7
of 153 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,914,360 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 9,071 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.2. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% 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 274,621 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 153 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 95% of its contemporaries.