Pilot corpus: NIH-funded biomedical datasets. Any DOI can be scored on demand — network effects sharpen as coverage grows.

Figures of: Tweets vs. Mendeley readers: How do these two social media metrics differ?

Figshare(2014)10.6084/m9.figshare.1007654Source: DataRank Database

Figures of: Tweets vs. Mendeley readers: How do these two social media metrics differ? is a research paper published in Figshare (2014). On theSindex it has a DataRank of 0.

N/A

0DataRank · unranked

Scored on demand from live citation data

Open Access0 citations

Free full text

Cite:

Linked data & code

DataRank reads this dataset's downstream impact straight off the citation graph — no black box, no proprietary weighting. How is this computed?

›Methodology & internals

datarank_citation_only_1hop_v6· scope data_onlyMethodology

Pipeline:MetadataData-paper checkEnrichmentCitation networkScoring

Enrichment:OA: greenTopics (9)Linked Datasets (2)DataCite Reuse (2)IDs (PubMed, OpenAlex)

FAIR Checklist

Context only (not used in score)

Findable (2/2)

Has DOI
Indexed in repositories

Accessible (1/2)

Open Access

Interoperable (2/2)

DataCite relations
Linked datasets

Reusable (0/3)

FAIR checklist signals are shown for context only and do not affect DataRank scoring.

Run a calibrated FAIR evaluation for this paper →

We only score data papers we can read in full — never from an abstract alone.

Authors (6)

Didier Amyot,Isabella Peters ORCID,Michael Thelwall ORCID,Vincent Larivière ORCID,Katy Börner ORCID

Live enrichment

PubMed:23304386 OpenAlex:https://openalex.org/W4394463087

greenLicense: cc-by

repositoryhttps://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.1007654

Fields of Study

Digital Marketing and Social MediaAdvanced Text Analysis TechniquesSocial Media and PoliticsFOS: Media and communications

Keywords

Library and Information StudiesSocial mediaComputer scienceWorld Wide WebInformation retrieval