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 |
Using expert knowledge to support Endangered Species Act decision‐making for data‐deficient species
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Conservation Biology, March 2021
|
| DOI | 10.1111/cobi.13694 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Daniel B. Fitzgerald, David R. Smith, David C. Culver, Daniel Feller, Daniel W. Fong, Jeff Hajenga, Matthew L. Niemiller, Daniel C. Nolfi, Wil D. Orndorff, Barbara Douglas, Kelly O. Maloney, John A. Young |
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 | 2 | 50% |
| 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 36 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 36 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 8 | 22% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 17% |
| Student > Master | 5 | 14% |
| Other | 2 | 6% |
| Professor | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 3 | 8% |
| Unknown | 10 | 28% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 12 | 33% |
| Environmental Science | 7 | 19% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 3% |
| Mathematics | 1 | 3% |
| Psychology | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 2 | 6% |
| Unknown | 12 | 33% |
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 23 January 2021.
All research outputs
#15,749,709
of 26,017,215 outputs
Outputs from Conservation Biology
#3,742
of 4,207 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#230,913
of 457,572 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Conservation Biology
#43
of 45 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,017,215 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,207 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 23.0. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% 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 457,572 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 45 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 2nd percentile – i.e., 2% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.