↓ Skip to main content

Social media in colorectal surgery

Overview of attention for article published in Colorectal Disease, November 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • One of the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#2 of 1,199)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (98th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (96th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
281 tweeters
f1000
1 research highlight platform

Citations

dimensions_citation
23 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
32 Mendeley
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.
Title
Social media in colorectal surgery
Published in
Colorectal Disease, November 2016
DOI 10.1111/codi.13572
Pubmed ID
Authors

Wexner, Steven D., Petrucci, Andrea M, Brady, Richard R., Ennis‐O'Connor, Marie, Fitzgerald, Edward, Mayol, Julio, Wexner, Steven D, Brady, Richard R, Ennis-O'Connor, Marie, Steven D. Wexner, Andrea M Petrucci, Richard R. Brady, Marie Ennis-O'Connor, Edward Fitzgerald, Julio Mayol, S. D. Wexner, A. M. Petrucci, R. R. Brady, M. Ennis-O'Connor, J. E. Fitzgerald, J. Mayol, Wexner, S. D., Petrucci, A. M., Brady, R. R., Ennis‐O'Connor, M., Fitzgerald, J. E., Mayol, J., M. Ennis‐O'Connor

Abstract

Social media engagement in healthcare continues to expand. For members of the colorectal community, social media has already made a significant impact on practice, education and patient care. The applications are unique such that they provide a platform for instant communication and information sharing with other users worldwide. The purpose of this article is to provide an overview of how social media has the potential to change clinical practice, training, research and patient care in colorectal surgery. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 281 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 32 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 3%
United States 1 3%
Turkey 1 3%
Unknown 29 91%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 22%
Researcher 5 16%
Unspecified 4 13%
Student > Postgraduate 3 9%
Student > Master 3 9%
Other 10 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 16 50%
Unspecified 7 22%
Engineering 3 9%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 3%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 3%
Other 4 13%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 173. 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 05 September 2018.
All research outputs
#66,253
of 12,247,121 outputs
Outputs from Colorectal Disease
#2
of 1,199 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#3,970
of 338,860 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Colorectal Disease
#1
of 27 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,247,121 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 1,199 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% 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 338,860 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 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 27 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.