↓ Skip to main content

Using expert knowledge to support Endangered Species Act decision‐making for data‐deficient species

Overview of attention for article published in Conservation Biology, March 2021
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (52nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 tweeters

Readers on

mendeley
8 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
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

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 8 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 8 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 3 38%
Researcher 2 25%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 25%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 13%
Other 1 13%
Other 0 0%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 50%
Environmental Science 2 25%
Psychology 1 13%
Unknown 1 13%

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
#10,358,100
of 18,336,925 outputs
Outputs from Conservation Biology
#2,996
of 3,425 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#166,840
of 354,484 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Conservation Biology
#38
of 38 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 18,336,925 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,425 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.4. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% 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 354,484 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 52% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 38 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.