| Title |
Ten simple rules for getting started on Twitter as a scientist
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
PLoS Computational Biology, February 2020
|
| DOI | 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1007513 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Veronika Cheplygina, Felienne Hermans, Casper Albers, Natalia Bielczyk, Ionica Smeets |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 1,110 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 | 193 | 17% |
| Netherlands | 86 | 8% |
| United Kingdom | 56 | 5% |
| Germany | 46 | 4% |
| Canada | 30 | 3% |
| Australia | 28 | 3% |
| France | 27 | 2% |
| India | 26 | 2% |
| Japan | 23 | 2% |
| Other | 203 | 18% |
| Unknown | 392 | 35% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 602 | 54% |
| Scientists | 432 | 39% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 40 | 4% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 35 | 3% |
| Unknown | 1 | <1% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 285 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 285 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 60 | 21% |
| Researcher | 57 | 20% |
| Student > Bachelor | 26 | 9% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 20 | 7% |
| Student > Master | 16 | 6% |
| Other | 43 | 15% |
| Unknown | 63 | 22% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 40 | 14% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 34 | 12% |
| Neuroscience | 17 | 6% |
| Computer Science | 15 | 5% |
| Social Sciences | 14 | 5% |
| Other | 82 | 29% |
| Unknown | 83 | 29% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 813. 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 28 March 2024.
All research outputs
#23,420
of 25,761,363 outputs
Outputs from PLoS Computational Biology
#18
of 9,033 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#732
of 482,689 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLoS Computational Biology
#2
of 138 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,761,363 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 9,033 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.4. 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 482,689 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 138 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 98% of its contemporaries.