↓ Skip to main content

Effects of Information Veracity and Message Frames on Information Dissemination: A Case Study of 2016 Zika Epidemic Discussion on Twitter

Overview of attention for article published in Health Communication, June 2020
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (58th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
4 tweeters
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
Effects of Information Veracity and Message Frames on Information Dissemination: A Case Study of 2016 Zika Epidemic Discussion on Twitter
Published in
Health Communication, June 2020
DOI 10.1080/10410236.2020.1773705
Pubmed ID
Authors

Qian Xu, Shi Chen, Lida Safarnejad

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 June 2020.
All research outputs
#8,156,540
of 15,550,283 outputs
Outputs from Health Communication
#709
of 1,124 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#100,566
of 244,399 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Health Communication
#26
of 40 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 15,550,283 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,124 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.9. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 244,399 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 58% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 40 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.