↓ Skip to main content

Plagiarism, salami slicing, and Lobachevsky

Overview of attention for article published in Skeletal Radiology, October 2008
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
19 Mendeley
Title
Plagiarism, salami slicing, and Lobachevsky
Published in
Skeletal Radiology, October 2008
DOI 10.1007/s00256-008-0599-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Leonard Berlin

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter 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 19 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 5%
Canada 1 5%
Unknown 17 89%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 7 37%
Professor > Associate Professor 4 21%
Student > Bachelor 2 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 11%
Other 1 5%
Other 3 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 7 37%
Chemistry 3 16%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 16%
Decision Sciences 1 5%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 1 5%
Other 4 21%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 08 October 2013.
All research outputs
#9,763,648
of 12,215,797 outputs
Outputs from Skeletal Radiology
#502
of 657 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#110,771
of 163,742 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Skeletal Radiology
#7
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,215,797 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 657 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.1. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 163,742 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 13 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 7th percentile – i.e., 7% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.