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 |
“Slow” skeletal muscles across vertebrate species
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cell & Bioscience, November 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13578-015-0054-6 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Victor M. Luna, Eriko Daikoku, Fumihito Ono |
| Abstract |
Skeletal muscle fibers are generally classified into two groups: slow (type I) and fast (type II). Fibers in each group are uniquely designed for specific locomotory needs based on their intrinsic cellular properties and the types of motor neurons that innervate them. In this review, we will focus on the current concept of slow muscle fibers which, unlike the originally proposed version based purely on amphibian muscles, varies widely depending on the animal model system studied. We will discuss recent findings from zebrafish neuromuscular junction synapses that may provide the framework for establishing a more unified view of slow muscles across mammalian and non-mammalian species. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 | 1 | 25% |
| Spain | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 2 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 75% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 58 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 2% |
| Poland | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 56 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 10 | 17% |
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 12% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 5 | 9% |
| Other | 5 | 9% |
| Other | 14 | 24% |
| Unknown | 11 | 19% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 17 | 29% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 9 | 16% |
| Neuroscience | 7 | 12% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 4 | 7% |
| Unspecified | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 5 | 9% |
| Unknown | 14 | 24% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 24 November 2015.
All research outputs
#13,216,332
of 22,833,393 outputs
Outputs from Cell & Bioscience
#239
of 930 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#129,092
of 281,503 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cell & Bioscience
#2
of 16 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,833,393 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 930 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% 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 281,503 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 16 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.