| Title |
Gender variations in citation distributions in medicine are very small and due to self-citation and journal prestige
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
eLife, July 2019
|
| DOI | 10.7554/elife.45374 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jens Peter Andersen, Jesper Wiborg Schneider, Reshma Jagsi, Mathias Wullum Nielsen |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 129 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 | 22 | 17% |
| United States | 16 | 12% |
| Germany | 8 | 6% |
| Denmark | 7 | 5% |
| Netherlands | 6 | 5% |
| Switzerland | 3 | 2% |
| Canada | 3 | 2% |
| Spain | 3 | 2% |
| France | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 12 | 9% |
| Unknown | 47 | 36% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 65 | 50% |
| Scientists | 54 | 42% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 9 | 7% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | <1% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 67 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 67 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 7 | 10% |
| Researcher | 6 | 9% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 9% |
| Other | 5 | 7% |
| Lecturer | 5 | 7% |
| Other | 19 | 28% |
| Unknown | 19 | 28% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Social Sciences | 12 | 18% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 7 | 10% |
| Computer Science | 4 | 6% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 4% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 4% |
| Other | 11 | 16% |
| Unknown | 27 | 40% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 76. 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 05 December 2022.
All research outputs
#570,479
of 26,017,215 outputs
Outputs from eLife
#1,705
of 15,811 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#11,928
of 363,159 outputs
Outputs of similar age from eLife
#43
of 404 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,017,215 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 15,811 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 35.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% 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 363,159 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 404 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.