| Title |
Mentorship Malpractice
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
JAMA: Journal of the American Medical Association, April 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1001/jama.2015.18884 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Vineet Chopra, Dana P. Edelson, Sanjay Saint |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 611 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 | 277 | 45% |
| Canada | 23 | 4% |
| United Kingdom | 20 | 3% |
| Australia | 18 | 3% |
| Spain | 10 | 2% |
| India | 8 | 1% |
| Italy | 5 | <1% |
| France | 3 | <1% |
| Switzerland | 3 | <1% |
| Other | 44 | 7% |
| Unknown | 200 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 290 | 47% |
| Scientists | 187 | 31% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 108 | 18% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 24 | 4% |
| Unknown | 2 | <1% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 153 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 3 | 2% |
| Argentina | 1 | <1% |
| Brazil | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 148 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 24 | 16% |
| Other | 16 | 10% |
| Professor | 16 | 10% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 16 | 10% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 15 | 10% |
| Other | 34 | 22% |
| Unknown | 32 | 21% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 60 | 39% |
| Psychology | 11 | 7% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 8 | 5% |
| Social Sciences | 7 | 5% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 5 | 3% |
| Other | 21 | 14% |
| Unknown | 41 | 27% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 412. 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 11 February 2024.
All research outputs
#72,849
of 25,765,370 outputs
Outputs from JAMA: Journal of the American Medical Association
#1,328
of 36,802 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#1,400
of 317,230 outputs
Outputs of similar age from JAMA: Journal of the American Medical Association
#33
of 401 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,765,370 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 36,802 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 72.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% 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 317,230 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 401 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 91% of its contemporaries.