↓ Skip to main content

Global Emergency Medicine Journal Club: Social Media Responses to the March 2014 Annals of Emergency Medicine Journal Club on Targeted Temperature Management∗

Overview of attention for article published in Annals of Emergency Medicine, August 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (80th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
11 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
24 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
41 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
Global Emergency Medicine Journal Club: Social Media Responses to the March 2014 Annals of Emergency Medicine Journal Club on Targeted Temperature Management∗
Published in
Annals of Emergency Medicine, August 2014
DOI 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2014.06.003
Pubmed ID
Authors

Brent Thoma, Daniel Rolston, Michelle Lin

Abstract

In March 2014, Annals of Emergency Medicine continued a successful collaboration with an academic Web site, Academic Life in Emergency Medicine (ALiEM), to host another Global Emergency Medicine Journal Club session featuring the 2013 New England Journal of Medicine article "Targeted Temperature Management at 33°C (91.4°F) Versus 36°C (96.8°F) After Cardiac Arrest" by Nielsen et al. This online journal club used Twitter conversations, a live videocast with the authors, and detailed discussions on the ALiEM Web site's comment section. This summary article details the community discussion, shared insights, and analytic data generated using this novel, multiplatform approach.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 11 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 41 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 3 7%
Ireland 1 2%
Denmark 1 2%
Unknown 36 88%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Professor > Associate Professor 6 15%
Other 6 15%
Student > Master 5 12%
Student > Bachelor 5 12%
Professor 4 10%
Other 15 37%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 25 61%
Computer Science 7 17%
Social Sciences 5 12%
Unspecified 2 5%
Psychology 1 2%
Other 1 2%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 26 November 2018.
All research outputs
#2,618,483
of 12,241,607 outputs
Outputs from Annals of Emergency Medicine
#1,738
of 4,421 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#38,461
of 201,556 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Annals of Emergency Medicine
#32
of 61 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,241,607 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 78th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,421 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% 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 201,556 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 80% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 61 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.