↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Article Metrics

Research methodological issues in evaluating herbal interventions

Overview of attention for article published in Open access journal of clinical trials, February 2010
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
2 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
27 Mendeley
Title
Research methodological issues in evaluating herbal interventions
Published in
Open access journal of clinical trials, February 2010
DOI 10.2147/oajct.s9029
Authors

Debasish Hota, Bansal, Chakrabarti, Chakrabarti

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 27 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 4%
Tanzania, United Republic of 1 4%
Unknown 25 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 7 26%
Student > Bachelor 5 19%
Student > Master 3 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 4%
Other 4 15%
Unknown 5 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 8 30%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 7%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 4%
Psychology 1 4%
Other 4 15%
Unknown 9 33%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 25 November 2020.
All research outputs
#11,519,369
of 19,496,717 outputs
Outputs from Open access journal of clinical trials
#21
of 63 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#232,029
of 468,563 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Open access journal of clinical trials
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 19,496,717 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 63 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% 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 468,563 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them