↓ Skip to main content

Building Community Through a #pulmcc Twitter Chat to Advocate for Pulmonary, Critical Care, and Sleep

Overview of attention for article published in CHEST, March 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (92nd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (85th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
41 tweeters
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
2 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
31 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
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
Building Community Through a #pulmcc Twitter Chat to Advocate for Pulmonary, Critical Care, and Sleep
Published in
CHEST, March 2017
DOI 10.1016/j.chest.2017.03.003
Pubmed ID
Authors

Christopher L. Carroll, Kristi Bruno, Pradeep Ramachandran

Abstract

Social media sites such as Twitter can significantly enhance education and advocacy efforts. In 2013, the American College of Chest Physicians (CHEST) launched a Twitter chat series using the hashtag #pulmcc to educate and advocate for topics related to pulmonary, critical care and sleep medicine. To assess the reach of these chats, we analyzed the metrics using Symplur analytics, and compared data from each chat, as well as participant data. Since 12/19/13, there have been twelve Twitter chats; six have been on Critical Care related topics, four on Pulmonary/Sleep related topics, and two conducted during the CHEST annual meeting on more general topics. During these one-hour Twitter chats there were a total of 4,212 tweets by 418 participants resulting in 9,361,519 impressions (i.e. views). There were similar numbers of participants and tweets in the three categories of Twitter chats, but there was a significantly greater reach during the more general Twitter chats conducted at the CHEST annual meeting with 1,596,013 + 126,472 impressions per chat session at these chats, compared to 739,203 + 73,109 impressions per chat session during the Critical Care Twitter chats and 621,965+ 123,933 impressions per chat session in the Pulmonary/Sleep chats. Seventy-five of the participants participated in 2 or more #pulmcc Twitter chats and the average percent of return participants in each chat was 30% + 7%. The large majority of the return participants were healthcare providers. Twitter chats can be a powerful tool for the widespread engagement of a medical audience.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 41 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 31 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Turkey 1 3%
Unknown 30 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 6 19%
Student > Master 5 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 13%
Unspecified 3 10%
Professor > Associate Professor 3 10%
Other 10 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 11 35%
Unspecified 4 13%
Chemistry 3 10%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 6%
Psychology 2 6%
Other 9 29%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 31. 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 23 November 2017.
All research outputs
#444,941
of 12,181,658 outputs
Outputs from CHEST
#372
of 8,270 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#19,454
of 258,096 outputs
Outputs of similar age from CHEST
#14
of 97 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,181,658 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,270 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.2. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% 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 258,096 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 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 97 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.