| Title |
A measure for the impact of research
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Scientific Reports, April 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1038/srep01649 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Alejandro M. Aragón |
| Abstract |
The last few years have seen the proliferation of measures that quantify the scientific output of researchers. Yet, most of these measures focus on productivity, thus fostering the "publish or perish" paradigm. This article proposes a measure that aims at quantifying the impact of research de-emphasizing productivity, thus providing scientists an alternative, conceivably fairer, evaluation of their work. The measure builds from a published manuscript, the literature's most basic building block. The impact of an article is defined as the number of lead authors that have been influenced by it. Thus, the measure aims at quantifying the manuscript's reach, putting emphasis on scientists rather than on raw citations. The measure is then extrapolated to researchers and institutions. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 21 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 | 5 | 24% |
| Spain | 4 | 19% |
| United States | 2 | 10% |
| Norway | 1 | 5% |
| Netherlands | 1 | 5% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 5% |
| Central African Republic | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 6 | 29% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 12 | 57% |
| Scientists | 7 | 33% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 10% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 132 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 5 | 4% |
| Spain | 3 | 2% |
| Italy | 1 | <1% |
| Brazil | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 122 | 92% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 23 | 17% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 20 | 15% |
| Other | 12 | 9% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 10 | 8% |
| Student > Bachelor | 9 | 7% |
| Other | 37 | 28% |
| Unknown | 21 | 16% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 12 | 9% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 11 | 8% |
| Physics and Astronomy | 10 | 8% |
| Computer Science | 8 | 6% |
| Engineering | 8 | 6% |
| Other | 52 | 39% |
| Unknown | 31 | 23% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 25. 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 21 April 2020.
All research outputs
#1,570,873
of 25,732,188 outputs
Outputs from Scientific Reports
#14,950
of 142,685 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#12,262
of 213,291 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Scientific Reports
#59
of 474 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,732,188 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 142,685 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 18.8. 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 213,291 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 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 474 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.