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

Strategy of robotic surgeons to exert public influence through Twitter

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal of Medical Robotics and Computer Assisted Surgery, February 2016
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 (#15 of 297)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (81st percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (87th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
18 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
3 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
22 Mendeley

What is this page?

Summary Twitter 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
Strategy of robotic surgeons to exert public influence through Twitter
Published in
International Journal of Medical Robotics and Computer Assisted Surgery, February 2016
DOI 10.1002/rcs.1739
Pubmed ID
26914176
Authors

Hendrik Borgmann, Jan Woelm, Karen Nelson, Kilian Gust, Rene Mager, Michael Reiter, David Schilling, Georg Bartsch, Roman Blaheta, Axel Haferkamp, Igor Tsaur

Abstract

Twitter is gaining growing popularity as a communication platform and potential tool to influence the public in medical matters. The aim here is to examine whether and how robotic surgeons use Twitter more influentially than other urologists. Robotic surgeons and other urologists that tweeted at the European urology congress were compared by assessing Twitter Follower/Following Ratio, Retweet Rank and Percentile and their Twitter strategies. Robotic surgeons had a significantly higher Twitter Follower/Following Ratio (2.1, 1.4-2.4) and Retweet Rank percentile (92.1%, 90.5-93%) than other urologists (1.2, 0.8-2.1 and 88.9%, 87.3-91.7%, respectively). Robotic surgeons used original tweet content and links more often than other urologists (69.4% vs 53.8%, and 19.8% vs 12.5%, respectively). Robotic surgeons had a higher public influence on Twitter than other urologists and posted original tweets and links in tweets and profiles more frequently. This strategy might optimize Twitter use by healthcare professionals in the future. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

View on publisher site

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 18 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 22 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 22 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 6 27%
Student > Postgraduate 3 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 14%
Other 2 9%
Professor > Associate Professor 2 9%
Other 3 14%
Unknown 3 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 13 59%
Social Sciences 2 9%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 5%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 5%
Computer Science 1 5%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 4 18%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 29 September 2017.
All research outputs
#3,081,514
of 20,216,965 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Medical Robotics and Computer Assisted Surgery
#15
of 297 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#50,440
of 276,804 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Medical Robotics and Computer Assisted Surgery
#2
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 20,216,965 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 84th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 297 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% 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 276,804 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 81% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 8 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 6 of them.

This page is provided by Altmetric.