↓ Skip to main content

Activity, content, contributors, and influencers of the twitter discussion on urologic oncology

Overview of attention for article published in Urologic Oncology, September 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (73rd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (77th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
11 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
21 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
36 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
Activity, content, contributors, and influencers of the twitter discussion on urologic oncology
Published in
Urologic Oncology, September 2016
DOI 10.1016/j.urolonc.2016.02.021
Pubmed ID
Authors

Hendrik Borgmann, Stacy Loeb, Johannes Salem, Christian Thomas, Axel Haferkamp, Declan G. Murphy, Igor Tsaur

Abstract

To analyse the activity, content, contributors, and influencers of the Twitter discussion on urologic oncology. We performed a comprehensive quantitative and qualitative Twitter analysis for the hashtags #prostatecancer, #bladdercancer, #kidneycancer, and #testicularcancer. Symplur was used to analyse activity over different time periods and the top influencers of the Twitter discussion. Tweet Archivist and Twitonomy analysis tools were used to assess characteristics of content and contributors. Twitter discussion on urologic oncology in 2014 contained 100,987 tweets created by 39,326 participants. Mean monthly tweet activity was 6,603±2,183 for #prostatecancer, 866±923 for #testicularcancer, 457±477 for #bladdercancer and 401±504 for #kidneycancer. Twitter activity increased by 41% in 2013 and by 122% in 2014. The content analysis detected awareness, cancer, and risk as frequently mentioned words in urologic oncology tweets. Prevalently used related hashtags were the general hashtag #cancer, awareness hashtags, and the respective cancer/urology tag ontology hashtags. Contributors originated from 41 countries on 6 continents and had a mean of 5,864±4,747 followers. They tweeted from platforms on exclusively mobile devices (39%) more frequently than from desktop devices (29%). Health care organizations accounted for 58% of the top influencers in all cancers. The largest proportion of physicians were among the #prostatecancer and #kidneycancer (each 9%) influencers and individual contributors were most frequent in the discussion on #kidneycancer (57%) and #testicularcancer (50%). There is a significant and growing activity in the Twitter discussion on urologic oncology, particularly on #prostatecancer. The Twitter discussion is global, social, and mobile, and merits attention of stakeholders in health care as a promising communication tool.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 3%
Unknown 35 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 5 14%
Unspecified 4 11%
Student > Bachelor 4 11%
Researcher 4 11%
Student > Master 4 11%
Other 15 42%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 13 36%
Unspecified 7 19%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 8%
Social Sciences 3 8%
Business, Management and Accounting 2 6%
Other 8 22%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 11 October 2018.
All research outputs
#2,836,750
of 12,122,790 outputs
Outputs from Urologic Oncology
#156
of 829 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#74,993
of 283,137 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Urologic Oncology
#6
of 27 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,122,790 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 76th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 829 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% 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 283,137 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 27 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.