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 |
Strengths and weakness of neuroscientific investigations of childhood poverty: future directions
|
---|---|
Published in |
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, February 2015
|
DOI | 10.3389/fnhum.2015.00053 |
Pubmed ID | |
Authors |
Sebastián J. Lipina, M. Soledad Segretin |
Abstract |
The neuroscientific study of child poverty is a topic that has only recently emerged. In comparison with previous reviews (e.g., Hackman and Farah, 2009; Lipina and Colombo, 2009; Hackman et al., 2010; Raizada and Kishiyama, 2010; Lipina and Posner, 2012), our perspective synthesizes findings, and summarizes both conceptual and methodological contributions, as well as challenges that face current neuroscientific approaches to the study of childhood poverty. The aim of this effort is to identify target areas of study that could potentially help build a basic and applied research agenda for the coming years. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 13 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 Kingdom | 3 | 23% |
Unknown | 10 | 77% |
Demographic breakdown
Type | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Members of the public | 10 | 77% |
Scientists | 2 | 15% |
Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 8% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 115 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Argentina | 1 | <1% |
Unknown | 114 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Student > Master | 22 | 19% |
Student > Ph. D. Student | 16 | 14% |
Researcher | 15 | 13% |
Student > Doctoral Student | 12 | 10% |
Professor | 7 | 6% |
Other | 31 | 27% |
Unknown | 12 | 10% |
Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Psychology | 34 | 30% |
Neuroscience | 16 | 14% |
Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 11 | 10% |
Social Sciences | 11 | 10% |
Medicine and Dentistry | 5 | 4% |
Other | 19 | 17% |
Unknown | 19 | 17% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 2017.
All research outputs
#4,381,710
of 24,520,187 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#1,939
of 7,493 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#60,927
of 367,288 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#68
of 182 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,520,187 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 82nd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,493 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% 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 367,288 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 182 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% of its contemporaries.