↓ Skip to main content

Data Sharing

Overview of attention for article published in New England Journal of Medicine, January 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (99th percentile)

Citations

dimensions_citation
241 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
369 Mendeley
citeulike
6 CiteULike
Title
Data Sharing
Published in
New England Journal of Medicine, January 2016
DOI 10.1056/nejme1516564
Pubmed ID
Authors

Dan L. Longo, Jeffrey M. Drazen

Abstract

The aerial view of the concept of data sharing is beautiful. What could be better than having high-quality information carefully reexamined for the possibility that new nuggets of useful data are lying there, previously unseen? The potential for leveraging existing results for even more benefit pays appropriate increased tribute to the patients who put themselves at risk to generate the data. The moral imperative to honor their collective sacrifice is the trump card that takes this trick. However, many of us who have actually conducted clinical research, managed clinical studies and data collection and analysis, and curated data sets have . . .

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2,195 tweeters 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 369 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 17 5%
United Kingdom 6 2%
Germany 3 <1%
Netherlands 3 <1%
Spain 3 <1%
South Africa 2 <1%
Canada 2 <1%
Austria 1 <1%
India 1 <1%
Other 7 2%
Unknown 324 88%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 98 27%
Student > Ph. D. Student 60 16%
Student > Master 34 9%
Professor 27 7%
Professor > Associate Professor 24 7%
Other 94 25%
Unknown 32 9%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 100 27%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 62 17%
Computer Science 40 11%
Social Sciences 26 7%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 23 6%
Other 71 19%
Unknown 47 13%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2104. 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 May 2020.
All research outputs
#1,165
of 15,136,881 outputs
Outputs from New England Journal of Medicine
#68
of 26,816 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#19
of 339,773 outputs
Outputs of similar age from New England Journal of Medicine
#1
of 351 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 15,136,881 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 26,816 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 76.8. 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 339,773 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 351 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.