↓ Skip to main content

Animal movements in fire‐prone landscapes

Overview of attention for article published in Biological Reviews, December 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#38 of 969)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (96th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (94th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
4 news outlets
twitter
64 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
1 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
35 Mendeley
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
Animal movements in fire‐prone landscapes
Published in
Biological Reviews, December 2018
DOI 10.1111/brv.12486
Pubmed ID
Authors

Dale G. Nimmo, Sarah Avitabile, Sam C. Banks, Rebecca Bliege Bird, Kate Callister, Michael F. Clarke, Chris R. Dickman, Tim S. Doherty, Don A. Driscoll, Aaron C. Greenville, Angie Haslem, Luke T. Kelly, Sally A. Kenny, José J. Lahoz‐Monfort, Connie Lee, Steven Leonard, Harry Moore, Thomas M. Newsome, Catherine L. Parr, Euan G. Ritchie, Kathryn Schneider, James M. Turner, Simon Watson, Martin Westbrooke, Mike Wouters, Matthew White, Andrew F. Bennett

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 64 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 35 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 35 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 29%
Researcher 7 20%
Unspecified 4 11%
Student > Postgraduate 2 6%
Student > Master 2 6%
Other 10 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 16 46%
Environmental Science 8 23%
Unspecified 8 23%
Chemical Engineering 1 3%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 1 3%
Other 1 3%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 73. 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 22 December 2018.
All research outputs
#221,435
of 13,155,608 outputs
Outputs from Biological Reviews
#38
of 969 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#10,544
of 322,617 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Biological Reviews
#1
of 18 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,155,608 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 969 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% 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 322,617 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 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 18 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 94% of its contemporaries.