↓ Skip to main content

Can Tweets Predict Citations? Metrics of Social Impact Based on Twitter and Correlation with Traditional Metrics of Scientific Impact

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Medical Internet Research, December 2011
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 5,106)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (99th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
blogs
44 blogs
policy
2 policy sources
twitter
1919 tweeters
facebook
17 Facebook pages
wikipedia
3 Wikipedia pages
googleplus
30 Google+ users
linkedin
1 LinkedIn user
reddit
3 Redditors

Citations

dimensions_citation
650 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
907 Mendeley
citeulike
20 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
Can Tweets Predict Citations? Metrics of Social Impact Based on Twitter and Correlation with Traditional Metrics of Scientific Impact
Published in
Journal of Medical Internet Research, December 2011
DOI 10.2196/jmir.2012
Pubmed ID
Authors

Gunther Eysenbach

Abstract

Citations in peer-reviewed articles and the impact factor are generally accepted measures of scientific impact. Web 2.0 tools such as Twitter, blogs or social bookmarking tools provide the possibility to construct innovative article-level or journal-level metrics to gauge impact and influence. However, the relationship of the these new metrics to traditional metrics such as citations is not known.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 1,919 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 907 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 34 4%
United Kingdom 25 3%
Spain 17 2%
Canada 13 1%
Germany 10 1%
Australia 6 <1%
France 5 <1%
Netherlands 5 <1%
Italy 5 <1%
Other 53 6%
Unknown 734 81%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 154 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 134 15%
Student > Master 121 13%
Librarian 105 12%
Other 79 9%
Other 255 28%
Unknown 59 7%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 204 22%
Computer Science 192 21%
Medicine and Dentistry 140 15%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 69 8%
Business, Management and Accounting 37 4%
Other 168 19%
Unknown 97 11%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1581. 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 09 April 2021.
All research outputs
#3,459
of 17,635,820 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Medical Internet Research
#2
of 5,106 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#3
of 198,885 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Medical Internet Research
#1
of 193 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 17,635,820 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 5,106 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 19.6. 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 198,885 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 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 193 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 99% of its contemporaries.