The following publications are possibly variants of this publication:
- National research impact indicators from Mendeley readersRuth Fairclough, Mike Thelwall. joi, 9(4):845-859, 2015. [doi]
- Early Mendeley readers correlate with later citation countsMike Thelwall. scientometrics, 115(3):1231-1240, 2018. [doi]
- Do Mendeley reader counts reflect the scholarly impact of conference papers? An investigation of computer science and engineeringKuku Joseph Aduku, Mike Thelwall, Kayvan Kousha. scientometrics, 112(1):573-581, 2017. [doi]
- Mendeley reader counts for US computer science conference papers and journal articlesMike Thelwall. qss, 1(1):347-359, 2020. [doi]
- Are Mendeley reader counts high enough for research evaluations when articles are published?Mike Thelwall. aslib, 69(2):174-183, 2017. [doi]
- Do Mendeley reader counts indicate the value of arts and humanities research?Mike Thelwall. jolis, 51(3), 2019. [doi]
- When are readership counts as useful as citation counts? Scopus versus Mendeley for LIS journalsNabeil Maflahi, Mike Thelwall. jasis, 67(1):191-199, 2016. [doi]