↓ Skip to main content

Folic Acid Supplementation for the Prevention of Neural Tube Defects: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement

Overview of attention for article published in JAMA: Journal of the American Medical Association, January 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (95th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
92 news outlets
blogs
5 blogs
policy
2 policy sources
twitter
217 X users
facebook
27 Facebook pages
wikipedia
3 Wikipedia pages
googleplus
2 Google+ users

Citations

dimensions_citation
228 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
303 Mendeley
Title
Folic Acid Supplementation for the Prevention of Neural Tube Defects: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement
Published in
JAMA: Journal of the American Medical Association, January 2017
DOI 10.1001/jama.2016.19438
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kirsten Bibbins-Domingo, David C. Grossman, Susan J. Curry, Karina W. Davidson, John W. Epling, Francisco A.R. García, Alex R. Kemper, Alex H. Krist, Ann E. Kurth, C. Seth Landefeld, Carol M. Mangione, William R. Phillips, Maureen G. Phipps, Michael P. Pignone, Michael Silverstein, Chien-Wen Tseng

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 217 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 303 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Egypt 1 <1%
Unknown 299 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 39 13%
Student > Bachelor 36 12%
Other 22 7%
Student > Ph. D. Student 21 7%
Researcher 19 6%
Other 62 20%
Unknown 104 34%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 88 29%
Nursing and Health Professions 35 12%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 16 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 14 5%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 8 3%
Other 35 12%
Unknown 107 35%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 902. 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 19 October 2023.
All research outputs
#19,577
of 25,784,004 outputs
Outputs from JAMA: Journal of the American Medical Association
#470
of 36,821 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#371
of 425,830 outputs
Outputs of similar age from JAMA: Journal of the American Medical Association
#18
of 372 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,784,004 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 36,821 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 98% 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 425,830 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 372 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 95% of its contemporaries.