"5 Mins of Uncomfyness Is Better than Dealing with Cancer 4 a Lifetime": an Exploratory Qualitative Analysis of Cervical and Breast Cancer Screening Dialogue on Twitter.

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Cancer Education, November 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • One of the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#4 of 253)
  • High score compared to outputs of the same age (94th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
28 tweeters

Readers on

mendeley
42 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this scholarly content. Click here to find out more.
Title
"5 Mins of Uncomfyness Is Better than Dealing with Cancer 4 a Lifetime": an Exploratory Qualitative Analysis of Cervical and Breast Cancer Screening Dialogue on Twitter.
Published in
Journal of Cancer Education, November 2012
DOI 10.1007/s13187-012-0432-2
Pubmed ID
Abstract

Twitter.com is a "micro-blogging" website. Although Twitter use is growing rapidly, little is known about health behavior discussions on this site, even though a majority of messages are publicly available. We retrieved publicly available Twitter messages during a 5-week period in early 2012, searching separately for the terms "Pap smear" and "mammogram." We used content analysis to code each 140-character message, generating a separate coding framework for each cancer screening term and calculating the frequencies of comments. Using the brief account description, we also coded the author as individual, organization, or news media outlet. There were 203 Pap smear and 271 mammogram messages coded, over three fourths of which were from individual accounts. Overall, 22 % of Pap smear messages and 25 % of mammogram messages discussed personal experiences, including attending appointments, negative sentiment about the procedure, and results. Other messages from both individuals and organizations (8 % Pap smear, 18 % mammogram) promoted screening. About one quarter of the messages expressed personal experiences with cancer screening. This demonstrates that Twitter can be a rich source of information and could be used to design new health-related interventions.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 28 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 42 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 4 10%
United Kingdom 1 2%
Unknown 37 88%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 3 7%
Researcher 1 2%
Unknown 38 90%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine 16 38%
Social Sciences 10 24%
Psychology 5 12%
Education 3 7%
Computer and Information Science 2 5%
Other 5 12%
Unknown 1 2%

Score in context

This research output has an Altmetric score of 19. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This score was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 29 October 2013.
All research outputs
#186,724
of 4,507,509 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Cancer Education
#4
of 253 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#4,085
of 81,479 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Cancer Education
#1
of 3 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 4,507,509 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 253 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean score of 2.3. 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 score to the 81,479 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 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3 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