| Title |
Implications of social media use on health information technology engagement: Data from HINTS 4 cycle 3
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Translational Behavioral Medicine, September 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s13142-016-0437-1 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Devlon N. Jackson, Wen-Ying Sylvia Chou, Kisha I. Coa, April Oh, Bradford Hesse |
| Abstract |
Little is known about the association between Internet/social media use and health information technology (HIT) engagement. This study examines patterns of social media use and HIT engagement in the U.S.A. using data from the 2013 Health Information National Trends Survey (N = 3,164). Specifically, predictors of two HIT activities (i.e., communicating with a healthcare provider using the Internet or email and tracking personal health information electronically) are examined. Persons who were females, higher education, non-Hispanic others, having a regular healthcare provider, and ages 35-44 were more likely to participate in HIT activities. After controlling for sociodemographics and health correlates, social media use was significantly associated with HIT engagement. To our knowledge, this is one of the first studies to systematically examine the use and relationships across multiple types of health-related online media. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 21 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 | 8 | 38% |
| United Kingdom | 2 | 10% |
| Canada | 1 | 5% |
| Germany | 1 | 5% |
| New Zealand | 1 | 5% |
| Ireland | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 7 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 12 | 57% |
| Scientists | 7 | 33% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 10% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 86 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Colombia | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 85 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 14 | 16% |
| Student > Master | 11 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 11 | 13% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 8 | 9% |
| Researcher | 6 | 7% |
| Other | 11 | 13% |
| Unknown | 25 | 29% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 11 | 13% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 9 | 10% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 6 | 7% |
| Computer Science | 5 | 6% |
| Psychology | 5 | 6% |
| Other | 20 | 23% |
| Unknown | 30 | 35% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 16. 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 29 August 2019.
All research outputs
#2,120,449
of 24,557,820 outputs
Outputs from Translational Behavioral Medicine
#118
of 1,058 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#36,165
of 327,877 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Translational Behavioral Medicine
#2
of 19 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,557,820 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,058 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% 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 327,877 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 19 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 94% of its contemporaries.