| Title |
How Social Media Is Changing the Practice of Regional Anesthesiology
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Current Anesthesiology Reports, April 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s40140-017-0213-x |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Eric S. Schwenk, Larry F. Chu, Rajnish K. Gupta, Edward R. Mariano |
| Abstract |
This review summarizes the current applications of social media in regional anesthesiology, describes ways that specific platforms may promote growth, and briefly discusses limitations and future directions. Although Facebook users outnumber Twitter users, the latter has been better studied in regional anesthesiology and may have the advantages of speed and expansion of reach. Highly tweeted publications are more likely to be cited in the medical literature, and twitter-enhanced journal clubs facilitate communication regarding important articles with international colleagues. In both the United States and internationally, Twitter has been shown to enhance the anesthesiology conference experience, changing communication among attendees and non-attendees. YouTube and podcasts are quickly finding a niche in regional anesthesiology for just-in-time training and continuing professional development. Social media use is rapidly growing in regional anesthesiology, and benefits include global interaction and knowledge translation within the specialty and with the general public. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 146 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 | 53 | 36% |
| United Kingdom | 11 | 8% |
| Canada | 9 | 6% |
| India | 3 | 2% |
| Netherlands | 2 | 1% |
| Spain | 2 | 1% |
| Italy | 2 | 1% |
| Belgium | 2 | 1% |
| Russia | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 11 | 8% |
| Unknown | 50 | 34% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 80 | 55% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 35 | 24% |
| Scientists | 20 | 14% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 11 | 8% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 32 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 32 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 5 | 16% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 3 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 9% |
| Researcher | 3 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 9 | 28% |
| Unknown | 7 | 22% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 15 | 47% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 6% |
| Social Sciences | 2 | 6% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 1 | 3% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 4 | 13% |
| Unknown | 7 | 22% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 88. 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 January 2021.
All research outputs
#493,703
of 25,918,104 outputs
Outputs from Current Anesthesiology Reports
#4
of 212 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#10,285
of 327,413 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Current Anesthesiology Reports
#1
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,918,104 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 212 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.4. 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 327,413 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 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 6 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them