| Title |
Firm action needed on predatory journals
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
British Medical Journal, January 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1136/bmj.h210 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jocalyn Clark, Richard Smith |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 88 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 | 15 | 17% |
| Spain | 8 | 9% |
| United States | 7 | 8% |
| Australia | 4 | 5% |
| Philippines | 2 | 2% |
| Netherlands | 2 | 2% |
| Canada | 2 | 2% |
| India | 2 | 2% |
| Timor-Leste | 1 | 1% |
| Other | 11 | 13% |
| Unknown | 34 | 39% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 50 | 57% |
| Scientists | 19 | 22% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 10 | 11% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 9 | 10% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 179 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 2 | 1% |
| Colombia | 1 | <1% |
| Netherlands | 1 | <1% |
| India | 1 | <1% |
| North Macedonia | 1 | <1% |
| Spain | 1 | <1% |
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 171 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Librarian | 39 | 22% |
| Researcher | 20 | 11% |
| Professor | 18 | 10% |
| Student > Master | 13 | 7% |
| Other | 10 | 6% |
| Other | 46 | 26% |
| Unknown | 33 | 18% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 39 | 22% |
| Social Sciences | 29 | 16% |
| Computer Science | 14 | 8% |
| Arts and Humanities | 11 | 6% |
| Psychology | 9 | 5% |
| Other | 35 | 20% |
| Unknown | 42 | 23% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 77. 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 December 2022.
All research outputs
#567,365
of 25,765,370 outputs
Outputs from British Medical Journal
#6,397
of 65,042 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#6,994
of 362,226 outputs
Outputs of similar age from British Medical Journal
#132
of 921 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 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 65,042 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 45.2. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% 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 362,226 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 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 921 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.