↓ Skip to main content

Changing the Rules of the Game: How Do We Measure Success in Social Media?

Overview of attention for article published in Clinics in Colon and Rectal Surgery, September 2017
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 (#30 of 159)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (79th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (54th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
11 tweeters
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
3 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
13 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
Changing the Rules of the Game: How Do We Measure Success in Social Media?
Published in
Clinics in Colon and Rectal Surgery, September 2017
DOI 10.1055/s-0037-1604254
Pubmed ID
Authors

Aisling Hogan, Desmond Winter, Aisling M. Hogan, Desmond C. Winter

Abstract

Ours will be the generation proud to say we shifted the sands of educational deserts by open access and proliferation, seeding of data sharing, and watering grassroots research in resource-compromised environments. Universal "social" media is defining features of modern professional life that provide powerful modes of knowledge acquisition/sharing to that end. Altmetric and other measurements stratify academic communications according to this alternate, online media presence (not academic penetrance). Are they meaningless, self-absorbed integers, or reliable yardsticks of scientific and educational prowess? Far beyond this trite, patronizing question from the minds of outdated, terrified technophobes, the real impact of "social" media is not narcissistic solipsism. Instant dissemination of contemporary surgical controversies on a truly global level drives improved (or at least reflective) health care for all. While a numerical assignment of value according to views, "likes," impressions, or "retweets" may seem meaningless to cynical, established academics, the impetus for universal improvement is self-evident. Electronic data and opinion sharing may not balance the inequity between low- and high-income countries, but it keeps it in perspective. The best way to shift desert sands is to blow on them constantly.

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 13 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 13 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Unspecified 2 15%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 15%
Student > Master 2 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 15%
Other 1 8%
Other 4 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 4 31%
Social Sciences 3 23%
Unspecified 2 15%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 8%
Sports and Recreations 1 8%
Other 2 15%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 25 October 2017.
All research outputs
#1,688,401
of 12,050,803 outputs
Outputs from Clinics in Colon and Rectal Surgery
#30
of 159 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#55,109
of 267,990 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinics in Colon and Rectal Surgery
#5
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,050,803 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 85th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 159 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% 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 267,990 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 79% 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 54% of its contemporaries.