Cameron Neylon
Latest journal ranking in the biological sciences -
Latest journal ranking in the biological sciences
This is actually rather interesting as it is based on papers that people think are worth keeping. Small sample size obviously but nonetheless. - Cameron Neylon
p.s. probably not immediately obvious from the thumbnail but the punchline is the suprising (or perhaps not?) fifth ranked journal - Cameron Neylon
In the long run these stats will be more interesting and will present a real view of what the academic community is reading and most probably citing. - Ricardo Vidal
I was looking into writing a plugin for Evince (the default pdf reader on Ubuntu) to record which papers I actually open and for how long. However, the hooks to make such a plugin seem to be missing for now. Maybe that kind of data would be interesting for Mendeley to collect also? - Anders Norgaard
w00t! (do I need to state my conflict of interest to say w00t?) - Bora Zivkovic
The sample size is ridiculously small to infer anything from this. - pn
Based on a total of 172,000 papers which is a fair number but there does seem to be relatively little overlap between peoples bookmarks. One of the things that jumps out if you look at "up and coming" in biosciences is a bunch of papers on Neutron Scattering that are a result of us writing a review. Intrigued as to who the third reader in each case is though :-) - Cameron Neylon
And what about the number of users? - pn
Apparently 1,243 in the biological sciences, looks about 5000 over all but not clear whether there is overlap between categories. - Cameron Neylon
Agreed that the sample size is still fairly small - but I'm seriously excited about where this will go!! / Anders: Tracking opening and reading time of PDFs is indeed the next planned step - the next major release (v0.7 beta) should have a PDF reader integrated! - Victor / Mendeley Team
Obviously number of readers is a measure of *something*, but is that something of value that the publishers of a scientific journal would like? For one thing, it is not normalized. PLoS ONE serves up many more papers in a month than do the Cell, Science, Nature and JBC together. - Iddo Friedberg
Bora, I was impressed to see that, too. I expect it's the early-adopter/friendfeed effect. Iddo - Number of readers is kinda like website traffic. There's all kinds of interesting analytics you can do with that. Length of time with the document open, number of times shared, annotations, tags, etc, and it's all per-document. - Mr. Gunn
If it is indeed per document I stand corrected. - Iddo Friedberg
@ Victor: will there be the ability to add comments to the rendered PDFs? What I'd really like the ability to do is to share the "sticky notes" and highlighting on PDFs. Seems like you could do this with what you're rolling I could go to, say, Cameron's profile and select, "always import PDF comments from this user." Or on a particular PDF, you could press a button "comments on this PDF available from these friends..." - Steve Koch
Steve, the 0.7 release should have an internal PDF viewer that allows annotation. They're not sure if sharing is going to land in this release or not, but the next one won't be too far behind. These guys move fast! - Mr. Gunn
@Iddo - actually JBC publishes almost 4,000 articles per year, Science and Nature both do about 2,300 per year (all article types), and Cell does about 500 odd. They also have decades of online output. PLoS ONE, otoh, is only 2 years old, and did almost 2,800 articles in 2008. I think a normalisation would actually move PLoS ONE significantly up this list... - Peter Binfield