↓ Skip to main content
What is this page? Embed badge

Social media: A tool to spread information: A case study analysis of Twitter conversation at the Cardiac Society of Australia

Overview of attention for article published in Collegian : journal of the Royal College of Nursing, Australia., June 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#27 of 596)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (92nd percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (63rd percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
20 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
81 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
158 Mendeley
Summary Blogs Twitter Facebook Google+ Dimensions citations
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: A tool to spread information: A case study analysis of Twitter conversation at the Cardiac Society of Australia & New Zealand 61st Annual Scientific Meeting 2013
Published in
Collegian : journal of the Royal College of Nursing, Australia., June 2014
DOI 10.1016/j.colegn.2014.03.002
Pubmed ID
25109206
Authors

Caleb Ferguson, Sally C. Inglis, Phillip J. Newton, Peter J.S. Cripps, Peter S. Macdonald, Patricia M. Davidson

Abstract

The World Wide Web has changed the way in which people communicate and consume information. More importantly, this innovation has increased the speed and spread of information. There has been recent increase in the percentage of cardiovascular professionals, including journals and associations using Twitter to engage with others and exchange ideas. Evaluating the reach and impact in scientific meetings is important in promoting the use of social media.

View on publisher site

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 20 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 158 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 6 4%
Canada 6 4%
United Kingdom 3 2%
South Africa 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
India 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Nigeria 1 <1%
Unknown 138 87%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 30 19%
Student > Bachelor 22 14%
Student > Master 19 12%
Researcher 12 8%
Other 10 6%
Other 45 28%
Unknown 20 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 30 19%
Computer Science 29 18%
Nursing and Health Professions 19 12%
Social Sciences 18 11%
Business, Management and Accounting 14 9%
Other 21 13%
Unknown 27 17%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 21. 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 13 August 2019.
All research outputs
#1,531,078
of 22,759,618 outputs
Outputs from Collegian : journal of the Royal College of Nursing, Australia.
#27
of 596 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#16,389
of 226,875 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Collegian : journal of the Royal College of Nursing, Australia.
#4
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,759,618 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 596 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.9. 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 226,875 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 11 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% of its contemporaries.

This page is provided by Altmetric.