↓ Skip to main content

Are pediatric Open Access journals promoting good publication practice? An analysis of author instructions

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Pediatrics, April 2011
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
21 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
28 Mendeley
connotea
1 Connotea
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
Are pediatric Open Access journals promoting good publication practice? An analysis of author instructions
Published in
BMC Pediatrics, April 2011
DOI 10.1186/1471-2431-11-27
Pubmed ID
Authors

Joerg J Meerpohl, Robert F Wolff, Gerd Antes, Erik von Elm

Abstract

Several studies analyzed whether conventional journals in general medicine or specialties such as pediatrics endorse recommendations aiming to improve publication practice. Despite evidence showing benefits of these recommendations, the proportion of endorsing journals has been moderate to low and varied considerably for different recommendations. About half of pediatric journals indexed in the Journal Citation Report referred to the Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) but only about a quarter recommended registration of trials. We aimed to investigate to what extent pediatric open-access (OA) journals endorse these recommendations. We hypothesized that a high proportion of these journals have adopted recommendations on good publication practice since OA electronic publishing has been associated with a number of editorial innovations aiming at improved access and transparency.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 28 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 7%
Germany 1 4%
Unknown 25 89%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 21%
Researcher 4 14%
Other 3 11%
Professor > Associate Professor 3 11%
Student > Bachelor 2 7%
Other 9 32%
Unknown 1 4%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 15 54%
Computer Science 4 14%
Business, Management and Accounting 2 7%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 4%
Psychology 1 4%
Other 3 11%
Unknown 2 7%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 December 2011.
All research outputs
#7,762,800
of 12,373,815 outputs
Outputs from BMC Pediatrics
#985
of 1,456 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#116,803
of 218,346 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Pediatrics
#48
of 62 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,373,815 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,456 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.9. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% 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 218,346 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 62 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.