You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Incidence of and risk factors for nodding off at scientific sessions
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Canadian Medical Association Journal, December 2004
|
| DOI | 10.1503/cmaj.1041570 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Kenneth Rockwood, David B Hogan, Christopher J Patterson |
| Abstract |
We conducted a surreptitious, prospective, cohort study to explore how often physicians nod off during scientific meetings and to examine risk factors for nodding off. After counting the number of heads falling forward during 2 days of lectures, we calculated the incidence density curves for nodding-off episodes per lecture (NOELs) and assessed risk factors using logistic regression analysis. In this article we report our eye-opening results and suggest ways speakers can try to avoid losing their audience. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 601 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 186 | 31% |
| United Kingdom | 54 | 9% |
| Canada | 27 | 4% |
| Australia | 19 | 3% |
| India | 12 | 2% |
| Spain | 7 | 1% |
| Germany | 7 | 1% |
| Mexico | 6 | <1% |
| Netherlands | 5 | <1% |
| Other | 69 | 11% |
| Unknown | 209 | 35% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 343 | 57% |
| Scientists | 148 | 25% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 90 | 15% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 20 | 3% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 84 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 7 | 8% |
| Spain | 2 | 2% |
| South Africa | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 74 | 88% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 19 | 23% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 12 | 14% |
| Other | 11 | 13% |
| Professor | 8 | 10% |
| Student > Master | 7 | 8% |
| Other | 21 | 25% |
| Unknown | 6 | 7% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 39 | 46% |
| Engineering | 7 | 8% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 7 | 8% |
| Mathematics | 4 | 5% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 17 | 20% |
| Unknown | 8 | 10% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 385. 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 18 February 2024.
All research outputs
#81,697
of 25,779,988 outputs
Outputs from Canadian Medical Association Journal
#147
of 9,556 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#84
of 153,465 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Canadian Medical Association Journal
#2
of 58 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,779,988 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 9,556 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 34.2. 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 153,465 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 58 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 96% of its contemporaries.