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 |
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. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
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 | 5 | 18% |
| Other | 4 | 14% |
| Researcher | 4 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 7% |
| Professor | 2 | 7% |
| Other | 9 | 32% |
| Unknown | 2 | 7% |
| 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% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 2 | 7% |
| Unknown | 3 | 11% |
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
#15,239,825
of 22,659,164 outputs
Outputs from BMC Pediatrics
#2,014
of 2,972 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#84,571
of 108,831 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Pediatrics
#8
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,659,164 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,972 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.6. 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 108,831 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 12 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.