Data Sharing

Overview of attention for article published in New England Journal of Medicine, January 2016

Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#36 of 25,602)
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: 44 news outlets
blogs: 53 blogs
policy: 2 policy sources
twitter: 2232 tweeters
peer_reviews: 1 peer review site

facebook: 16 Facebook pages
wikipedia: 2 Wikipedia pages
googleplus: 10 Google+ users
reddit: 7 Redditors
video: 1 video uploader

Citations

dimensions_citation: 195 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley: 295 Mendeley
citeulike: 6 CiteULike

Summary News Blogs Policy documents Twitter Peer reviews Facebook Wikipedia Google+ Reddit Video Dimensions citations

So far, Altmetric has seen 7 Reddit threads by 7 users.

(Article en anglais du NEJM) Le partage des données en science

User EHStormcrow, in the France subreddit, 28 Jan 2016

The Downsides of Data Sharing

User Stewpid, in the Science: Uncensored. Science with no political censorship by Mods subreddit, 26 Jan 2016

The New England Journal of Medicine on Data Sharing

User RalphSchmaccio, in the what matters in healthcare information technology subreddit, 24 Jan 2016

Open data and "Research Parasites"

User JonvonNeumann, in the bioinformatics subreddit, 22 Jan 2016

In which NEJM editor-in-chief calls some open data reanalysis "parasitic"

User imitationcheese, in the Open Data subreddit, 22 Jan 2016

NEJM editors bemoan "research parasites" who hoped to confirm or refute findings by reexamining data!

User ericstrong, in the Meddit, a community for the study and discussion of medicine subreddit, 22 Jan 2016

NEJM editor describes new generation scientist as 'Research Parasite'. (third paragraph)

User labrazil, in the Everything Science subreddit, 22 Jan 2016