acknowledgement to reviewers of brain sciences in 2016
Clicks: 49
ID: 229812
2017
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This
article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score —
reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
Reader Engagement
Steady Performance
14.4
/100
49 views
3 readers
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
SteadyRanked #42 of 42 articles by views in bulletin of chemical reaction engineering & catalysis
Most read
Least read
Bar heights use a square-root scale.
Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet mintedCreate a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.
5
SUSD
one-off · no wallet required
Abstract
The editors of Brain Sciences would like to express their sincere gratitude to the following reviewers for assessing manuscripts in 2016.[...]
Abstract Quality Issue:
This abstract appears to be incomplete or contains metadata (20 words).
Try re-searching for a better abstract.
| Reference Key |
office2017brainacknowledgement
Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using
SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
|
|---|---|
| Authors | ;Brain Sciences Editorial Office |
| Journal | bulletin of chemical reaction engineering & catalysis |
| Year | 2017 |
| DOI |
10.3390/brainsci7010007
|
| URL | |
| Keywords |
Citations
No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org
Comments
No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.