Mentions
Extended reach
Total likes
Video views
AI synopsis
Many discussions highlight personal reflections on the Kardashian Index, such as @MGerber_Unibas' comment about not wanting to mess up their index, indicating a blend of humor and seriousness. Others, like @phil_opus, humorously question if they are a 'Science Kardashian', showcasing a satirical tone that pervades the posts. The choice of words and lighthearted tone contribute to a sense of camaraderie among participants and illustrate the absurdity of measuring scientists by social media popularity.
The majority of discussions indicate a general acceptance of the concept behind the Kardashian Index, with many acknowledging its relevance.
There's a high level of curiosity reflected in the discussions, as many participants express intrigue and humor regarding the metric.
While most posts do engage with the idea, the level of depth varies; some mention personal K-Index scores or broader implications of social media in science.
Participants perceive the Kardashian Index as having a significant impact on how scientific contributions are viewed in relation to social media presence.
シンポ37 Kardashian index：SNSでは目立っているが学術業績はmodestな人を定量化する指標 Kardashian index＝Xのフォロワー数/論文の引用数 "if your K-index gets above 5, then it’s time to get off Twitter and write those papers." https://t.co/Kry8lXRPvd #JPCA2025
@julianop_a @OrnithoAle Nop https://t.co/ReKdzseTHm
The "Kardashian Index" as a measure is ridiculous (https://t.co/HhuI5mdjlV) but the idea of a disparity between influence in different arenas is not. Here are the GS citations and Twitter followers for 105 sociologists & me (correlation = .26 top-coded, or .37 with logged values) https://t.co/tocW2LaSP6
Took nearly 10 years to get to this point but I am very grateful to all of you for helping me reach this nice round number. Thankfully, I am not a Science Kardashian, since that title requires a K-Index > 5, whereas mine is a very modest 0.35.
Check your self before you tweet yourself...the STROKE literature succumbs to "social media"...https://t.co/lVt30dVCQq #thinkbeforetweet
The Kardashian Index Reference: https://t.co/fN0wjBLDfA https://t.co/Dm6ajVcBHC
This video explores whether academics should engage with social media platforms. It discusses the Kardashian Index, which compares social media following to academic citations, emphasizing the need to balance online…
This video discusses the intersection of physical performance and social media's influence in science. It features research on aging agility, exercise responses, and the Kardashian Index, assessing discrepancies between…
Science communication is optional in academia, but it offers numerous benefits to improve your mental health, writing, and collaboration. This video explores the Kardashian Index, a metric comparing social media…
RT @manabunoda: シンポ37 Kardashian index：SNSでは目立っているが学術業績はmodestな人を定量化する指標 Kardashian index＝Xのフォロワー数/論文の引用数 "if your K-index gets above 5, t…
RT @manabunoda: シンポ37 Kardashian index：SNSでは目立っているが学術業績はmodestな人を定量化する指標 Kardashian index＝Xのフォロワー数/論文の引用数 "if your K-index gets above 5, t…
RT @manabunoda: シンポ37 Kardashian index：SNSでは目立っているが学術業績はmodestな人を定量化する指標 Kardashian index＝Xのフォロワー数/論文の引用数 "if your K-index gets above 5, t…
RT @manabunoda: シンポ37 Kardashian index：SNSでは目立っているが学術業績はmodestな人を定量化する指標 Kardashian index＝Xのフォロワー数/論文の引用数 "if your K-index gets above 5, t…
RT @manabunoda: シンポ37 Kardashian index：SNSでは目立っているが学術業績はmodestな人を定量化する指標 Kardashian index＝Xのフォロワー数/論文の引用数 "if your K-index gets above 5, t…
RT @manabunoda: シンポ37 Kardashian index：SNSでは目立っているが学術業績はmodestな人を定量化する指標 Kardashian index＝Xのフォロワー数/論文の引用数 "if your K-index gets above 5, t…
RT @manabunoda: シンポ37 Kardashian index：SNSでは目立っているが学術業績はmodestな人を定量化する指標 Kardashian index＝Xのフォロワー数/論文の引用数 "if your K-index gets above 5, t…
RT @manabunoda: シンポ37 Kardashian index：SNSでは目立っているが学術業績はmodestな人を定量化する指標 Kardashian index＝Xのフォロワー数/論文の引用数 "if your K-index gets above 5, t…
RT @manabunoda: シンポ37 Kardashian index：SNSでは目立っているが学術業績はmodestな人を定量化する指標 Kardashian index＝Xのフォロワー数/論文の引用数 "if your K-index gets above 5, t…
RT @manabunoda: シンポ37 Kardashian index：SNSでは目立っているが学術業績はmodestな人を定量化する指標 Kardashian index＝Xのフォロワー数/論文の引用数 "if your K-index gets above 5, t…
RT @manabunoda: シンポ37 Kardashian index：SNSでは目立っているが学術業績はmodestな人を定量化する指標 Kardashian index＝Xのフォロワー数/論文の引用数 "if your K-index gets above 5, t…
RT @manabunoda: シンポ37 Kardashian index：SNSでは目立っているが学術業績はmodestな人を定量化する指標 Kardashian index＝Xのフォロワー数/論文の引用数 "if your K-index gets above 5, t…
RT @manabunoda: シンポ37 Kardashian index：SNSでは目立っているが学術業績はmodestな人を定量化する指標 Kardashian index＝Xのフォロワー数/論文の引用数 "if your K-index gets above 5, t…
RT @manabunoda: シンポ37 Kardashian index：SNSでは目立っているが学術業績はmodestな人を定量化する指標 Kardashian index＝Xのフォロワー数/論文の引用数 "if your K-index gets above 5, t…
RT @manabunoda: シンポ37 Kardashian index：SNSでは目立っているが学術業績はmodestな人を定量化する指標 Kardashian index＝Xのフォロワー数/論文の引用数 "if your K-index gets above 5, t…
RT @manabunoda: シンポ37 Kardashian index：SNSでは目立っているが学術業績はmodestな人を定量化する指標 Kardashian index＝Xのフォロワー数/論文の引用数 "if your K-index gets above 5, t…
RT @manabunoda: シンポ37 Kardashian index：SNSでは目立っているが学術業績はmodestな人を定量化する指標 Kardashian index＝Xのフォロワー数/論文の引用数 "if your K-index gets above 5, t…
RT @manabunoda: シンポ37 Kardashian index：SNSでは目立っているが学術業績はmodestな人を定量化する指標 Kardashian index＝Xのフォロワー数/論文の引用数 "if your K-index gets above 5, t…
RT @manabunoda: シンポ37 Kardashian index：SNSでは目立っているが学術業績はmodestな人を定量化する指標 Kardashian index＝Xのフォロワー数/論文の引用数 "if your K-index gets above 5, t…
RT @manabunoda: シンポ37 Kardashian index：SNSでは目立っているが学術業績はmodestな人を定量化する指標 Kardashian index＝Xのフォロワー数/論文の引用数 "if your K-index gets above 5, t…
シンポ37 Kardashian index：SNSでは目立っているが学術業績はmodestな人を定量化する指標 Kardashian index＝Xのフォロワー数/論文の引用数 "if your K-index gets above 5, then it’s time to get off Twitter and write those papers." https://t.co/Kry8lXRPvd #JPCA2025
RT @Matsuda_PhDPhD: カーダシアンインデックス（K-Index） K-Index（カーダシアン指数）は、科学者のSSNでの影響力と学術的な業績との差を測定するため、一種の風刺的な指標です。 2014年にNeil Hallによって提唱され、論文も出ています…
@phil_opus @Jringo1508 @alexthechick @LawSelfDefense @monsterhunter45 @TKratman "Kardashian of Science" is appropriate: https://t.co/thwKU28Bey Neil has the highest Kardashian Index: https://t.co/Eb2pZmZBOf
RT @selcukorkmaz: The “Kardashian Index” is here-measuring if your Twitter fame outshines your citations! Are you a Science Kardashian? If…
RT @selcukorkmaz: The “Kardashian Index” is here-measuring if your Twitter fame outshines your citations! Are you a Science Kardashian? If…
The “Kardashian Index” is here-measuring if your Twitter fame outshines your citations! Are you a Science Kardashian? If your K-Index is high, maybe it’s time to turn those tweets into research papers. #Science https://t.co/FWvt3um5MG
@tkmpkm1_mkkr 先生の場合、フォロアー数がとんでもないですから。。。論文のディスカッションの末尾に↓が書かれていて、泣きそうになりました(;｡;) if your K-index gets above 5, then it’s time to get off Twitter and write those papers. https://t.co/XgtyRHd2ox
カーダシアンインデックス（K-Index） K-Index（カーダシアン指数）は、科学者のSSNでの影響力と学術的な業績との差を測定するため、一種の風刺的な指標です。 2014年にNeil Hallによって提唱され、論文も出ています。↓Genome Biology、OAです https://t.co/XgtyRHdAe5
My Kardashian Index is 1.16. Which I think is respectable.
@MGerber_Unibas I don't want to mess up my Kardashian Index. https://t.co/oZJL9mkbwK
@baym A suboptimal metric of publishing impact. IMO the Kardashian Index is more accurate. https://t.co/ObbXZkBHQD
@evelynedeleeuw @GuillermElodie Some academics love it https://t.co/jrUokfexWc @KristofDecoste1
@MichaelEMann @GeraldKutney @MatthewWielicki @maxinthevalley @curryja @jordanbpeterson @neilhall_uk Source: https://t.co/4cWHoYUViQ
@aryehazan @davidmanheim Hmm, MEI (Mathematical Ego Index)? 28000 in my case. I think the Kardashian index (where I score dangerously high, 33.7) is more useful. They are no doubt highly correlated. https://t.co/IW5oEVfDOx
@JMill_er https://t.co/Cf5BcDXMYl
@rquiroga777 en 2014 salió https://t.co/I60vHf2HOP creo que en algún momento deberían leerlo quienes toman decisiones en los organismos de ciencia, por lo menos para empezar a discutir el valor de la comunicación científica. Fuerzas
Y que sepáis que esto no es broma y está publicado en un artículo científico ⬇️ https://t.co/luGoICIFI6
Se tenía que hacer... y se hizo
@OdedRechavi The Kardashian index is intriguing: https://t.co/ObbXZkBHQD
achei muito engraçado, mas realmente interessante pra pensar as redes sociais como catapulta na divulgação científica. de fato a ideia de que todos falamos no mesmo volume na internet é absurda e é complicada a projeção de certas figuras por aqui + https://t.co/ppPn2FnByV
@bielleogy Kardashian Index is a classic https://t.co/8haAJr0Xih
Any news about the Kardashian index ? https://t.co/jrUokfexWc
@MichaelTHartney @Brian_Riedl I think that comes from Neil Hall. https://t.co/oCw2KCd0IA.
How's Kardashian index (k-index) for those who share their published research on facebook... https://t.co/0fzyRLB4jG
@RhedinSamuel @ActaPaediatrica @surf4children @LagercrantzHugo Twitter likes don’t count unfortunately Although my followers are contributing to my K index https://t.co/aMNtq3uR3W
Just calculated my Kardashian Index and was disappointed to find that it is < 5, which essentially means I'm a nerd and need more clout on twitter. https://t.co/lOs9bCwZD6 https://t.co/XzvCQr0n7J
If You are Concerned...
An article for all scientists who post views on Twitter.
The Kardashian Index https://t.co/aUf7Uhxc0D
RT @limbsalvagedr: @UkVenous @JeanBismuth https://t.co/VkyDIxWRAB a fun article on that very topic
@UkVenous @JeanBismuth https://t.co/VkyDIxWRAB a fun article on that very topic
@LeanLaje @margaletrafel @pacomarhuenda Buena excusa, pero en Scopus no solo se indexan fuentes de ciencia, sino que también de humanidades y tecnología. Laje no es más que un Kardashian. https://t.co/2tuiU0rPa6
@Marco37639007 @EmmaRincon Ya veo, son algo así como unos kardashians tipo Agustín Laje. https://t.co/2tuiU0smZE
RT @dliebesk: Check your self before you tweet yourself...the STROKE literature succumbs to "social media"...https://t.co/lVt30dVCQq #thin…
RT @dliebesk: Check your self before you tweet yourself...the STROKE literature succumbs to "social media"...https://t.co/lVt30dVCQq #thin…
Check your self before you tweet yourself...the STROKE literature succumbs to "social media"...https://t.co/lVt30dVCQq #thinkbeforetweet
Be careful, you don't want to end up on the Kardashian Index do you?
RT @MKIttlesonMD: @AmitGoyalMD @iamritu @gina_lundberg @KTamirisaMD @Drvic_thomas @SharonneHayes @DrLaPrincess @noshreza @RyanTedfordMD @AH…
@AmitGoyalMD @iamritu @gina_lundberg @KTamirisaMD @Drvic_thomas @SharonneHayes @DrLaPrincess @noshreza @RyanTedfordMD @AHajduczok @ShreyaTrivediMD @JasonKatzMD @AnnGageMD @AndrewJSauer @jelevenson @AkoczoAgnes @Ajar_Kochar @natstokes @JennaSkowronski Great topic! I'm rooting for both you you :) Value: https://t.co/PwofjaFIBu Pitfalls: https://t.co/2Zx5n5iLAN
@SaraTetraDec I found it's slightly disappointed that they didn't really put granny in the main text. And, here is my favorite one from BMC https://t.co/HRPIzpH2Ls
Took nearly 10 years to get to this point but I am very grateful to all of you for helping me reach this nice round number. Thankfully, I am not a Science Kardashian, since that title requires a K-Index > 5, whereas mine is a very modest 0.35.
In this time and age… this may come in handy
@BorisBarbour @mbeisen https://t.co/cT4yhohXs9 :)
The Kardashian Index - are renowned scientists the most influential as measured by twitter followers?
@lucas_c_parra From the original paper: https://t.co/ODtikh7pr4. Phew, I can keep tweeting for a little bit more! https://t.co/G210SGYY6K
@kirk_roberts @allisonbmccoy @deansittig @culehmann Maybe it’s time to revisit the Kardashian Index? Back then, mine was where it should be. Have our priorities changed? https://t.co/Wj7S4nXBpQ
@professor_dave https://t.co/F5RDB8qPDT
RT @ChrisRegulus1: En una era dominada por el culto a la celebridad, los científicos no deben elogiar sin sentido la popularidad superficia…
En una era dominada por el culto a la celebridad, los científicos no deben elogiar sin sentido la popularidad superficial de sus pares. Por ello se propone el índice Kardashian; una cuantificación simple del rendimiento de un científico en redes sociales. https://t.co/2tuiU0smZE
RT @rofe6065: I never knew this existed, but it is kind of funny and maybe has some satirical truths https://t.co/1ObNrpKCSS
I never knew this existed, but it is kind of funny and maybe has some satirical truths https://t.co/1ObNrpKCSS
L'information indispensable de la semaine : le site pour calculer votre index Kardashian https://t.co/4R29VeWjkc avec les #API de @Twitter (https://t.co/9gPLebf4Hr) et @googlescholar_ Oh la bonne idée de TP pour les @MedasMaster et @MedasNantes ;) https://t.co/IYMJJZZC59 https://t.co/1libjnKEcd
Very very true. Reminds me of this under appreciated paper as well. https://t.co/7tiIl53Ni4 https://t.co/Bqh4S55XYA
@EckerleIsabella @PSHolstein https://t.co/elPebV1sjn
"...there is a danger that this form of communication is gaining too high a value and that we are losing sight of key metrics of scientific value, such as citation indices." https://t.co/gGMySakHId
RT @vaillancourt_dr: This 2014 paper really applies to Twitter. People (men) with big followings and not much (if any) scientific output…
This 2014 paper really applies to Twitter. People (men) with big followings and not much (if any) scientific output are lauded as being experts. It happens all the time. Hint: Look up a person’s H index to see their scientific contributions. https://t.co/qBK0aVMplk
@marie_holmqvist https://t.co/fFzsc8L8dt. Du kan räkna ut ditt index här: https://t.co/B7Tmj3O7rz
https://t.co/BgRrb0IDjk ha
@AgustinLaje No entiendo porqué eres tendencia ni menos porqué hay gente que te toma en serio siendo que en Scopus no existes, eres peor que un Kardashian. https://t.co/2tuiU0rPa6
RT @LesFaeLeith: @PBSherren This is a well studied phenomenon called The Kardashian Index. https://t.co/OKPbEzXpki
@PBSherren This is a well studied phenomenon called The Kardashian Index. https://t.co/OKPbEzXpki
@FriendsOfSciMed @ScienceBasedMed https://t.co/HJkk2k9t3i
The Kardashian index: a measure of discrepant social media profile for scientists https://t.co/KZ2lGy0Ry8
@R_J_Gilmour Whoops looks like I made a PEMDAS error when I first calculated it
Source: https://t.co/VhQ8Luy8DQ
@rsalakhu In some fields I believe the term is "Kardashian": https://t.co/Qo9jzr1p8i
RT @MaxSchemmer: P.S.S.: I really like the link that these authors establish between gender and Kardashianity: https://t.co/LYMikrzPm7
RT @familyunequal: The "Kardashian Index" as a measure is ridiculous (https://t.co/HhuI5mdjlV) but the idea of a disparity between influenc…
RT @familyunequal: The "Kardashian Index" as a measure is ridiculous (https://t.co/HhuI5mdjlV) but the idea of a disparity between influenc…
P.S.S.: I really like the link that these authors establish between gender and Kardashianity: https://t.co/LYMikrzPm7
RT @familyunequal: The "Kardashian Index" as a measure is ridiculous (https://t.co/HhuI5mdjlV) but the idea of a disparity between influenc…
Possibly late to the party, but still interesting. Kardashian Index calculator https://t.co/4sTzHbVYTf Here is the original paper: https://t.co/YjfqjJjrEG https://t.co/tFK5t9wTR2
RT @familyunequal: The "Kardashian Index" as a measure is ridiculous (https://t.co/HhuI5mdjlV) but the idea of a disparity between influenc…
RT @familyunequal: The "Kardashian Index" as a measure is ridiculous (https://t.co/HhuI5mdjlV) but the idea of a disparity between influenc…
The "Kardashian Index" as a measure is ridiculous (https://t.co/HhuI5mdjlV) but the idea of a disparity between influence in different arenas is not. Here are the GS citations and Twitter followers for 105 sociologists & me (correlation = .26 top-coded, or .37 with logged values) https://t.co/tocW2LaSP6
I’m undervalued ! I need more followers please ! #Science Kardashian’s it’s maybe time to reconsider our priorities…. Very interesting paper ! https://t.co/5QoQH0lXwY
@GevaertThomas @TijlDeBie @vanranstmarc Nee, wat ècht telt is je KI. https://t.co/t19zh24JFu
Read ➡️ https://t.co/urnQRWzwT4 Now, what are your thoughts on the Kardashian-index? (anonymous poll) #PathTwitter #MedTwitter @KMirza @Sara_Jiang @smlungpathguy @DrFNA @NRiddleMD @drjudymelinek @AllisonHHMartin @pembeoltulu @kidney_boy @bluehatcomics85 @cullen_lilley
@smlungpathguy @KimKardashian @neilhall_uk @NicoleJacksonMD @KMirza @DrFNA @VetPathSurrey You must read the 2014 paper from @neilhall_uk: https://t.co/urnQRWzwT4 Yes, it's (partly) satirical but some valid points are made. Multiple review articles and SoMe research into IR, cardiology, radiology, etc. tackles the K-index.
Source for "Kardashian of Science," unrelated to Sheldon Cooper's [unfair] description of Geology: https://t.co/thwKU1Qs0q https://t.co/7A2YlnOICL
No dejo sorprenderme cuando me pongo investigar para mis clases
@FelipePLMelo Segue o artigo que deu origem ao índice: https://t.co/X2z1gXxtGE
@STS_News Kardashian Index? https://t.co/gah7VOhOFi
@ricardolugon https://t.co/pGC8nG8pfX
RT @PsychRabble: @PsychPLockwood It is worth it, if only because it led to the development of the Kardashian Index: A scientific metric for…
@PsychPLockwood It is worth it, if only because it led to the development of the Kardashian Index: A scientific metric for evaluating undue and excessive public influence of scientists who have not really contributed all that much actual science. https://t.co/RjdR25D16R
RT @Abraham_RMI: The Kardashian Index Reference: https://t.co/fN0wjBLDfA https://t.co/Dm6ajVcBHC
RT @Abraham_RMI: The Kardashian Index Reference: https://t.co/fN0wjBLDfA https://t.co/Dm6ajVcBHC
RT @Abraham_RMI: The Kardashian Index Reference: https://t.co/fN0wjBLDfA https://t.co/Dm6ajVcBHC
RT @Abraham_RMI: The Kardashian Index Reference: https://t.co/fN0wjBLDfA https://t.co/Dm6ajVcBHC
The Kardashian Index Reference: https://t.co/fN0wjBLDfA https://t.co/Dm6ajVcBHC
RT @HarvardMacy: What are we reading in #HMIVirtual this week? "The Kardashian index: a measure of discrepant social media profile for sci…
What are we reading in #HMIVirtual this week? "The Kardashian index: a measure of discrepant social media profile for scientists" by Neil Hall in @GenomeBiology #MedTwitter #MedEd @afrey_vogel @tchanmd @socraticem @laurenmazzurco @JudyGadde @erhall1 https://t.co/9zUPuFDhgt https://t.co/rqaHpcHmzY
RT @HarvardMacy: What are we reading in #HMIVirtual this week? "Consensus Guidelines for Digital Scholarship in Academic Promotion" by @ab…
RT @HarvardMacy: What are we reading in #HMIVirtual this week? "Consensus Guidelines for Digital Scholarship in Academic Promotion" by @ab…
RT @HarvardMacy: What are we reading in #HMIVirtual this week? "Consensus Guidelines for Digital Scholarship in Academic Promotion" by @ab…
RT @HarvardMacy: What are we reading in #HMIVirtual this week? "Consensus Guidelines for Digital Scholarship in Academic Promotion" by @ab…
What are we reading in #HMIVirtual this week? "Consensus Guidelines for Digital Scholarship in Academic Promotion" by @abbashu and colleagues! #MedTwitter #MedEd @felixankel @tchanmd @Jeff__Riddell @mgisondi @MikeGisondi @CabreraERDR @EMEducation https://t.co/9zUPuFDhgt https://t.co/xIeoWSFAaA
¿Indice Kardashian para la divulgación científica en las redes sociales? Interesante estudio publicado en 2014. https://t.co/TgIqBEWjpO https://t.co/Y2w3ZBjz2n
@Andrew_S_Rosen @nanobrumberg @andrewwhite01 It's a manuscript by @neilhall_uk actually! https://t.co/RJN5Orhqu5
@UCDflowerpower @jomcinerney indeed it does; see, https://t.co/3KlA7tvys4
@ufukozgul @Twitter Probably only my k-index: https://t.co/XkbM1hpS5K
@EvYemini https://t.co/HiGSZOOeO3
2/ The Kardashian Index: a measure of discrepant social media profile for scientists, named after Kim Kardashian- a celebrity who in my estimation is famous mainly for being famous and compares the No of Teitterfollowers a scientist has to No of citations have peer-reviewed work
RT @acnavascalixto: @julianop_a @OrnithoAle Nop https://t.co/ReKdzseTHm
RT @acnavascalixto: @julianop_a @OrnithoAle Nop https://t.co/ReKdzseTHm
El "Kardashian Index", el "índice de impacto" que tiene un investigador/a en redes sociodigitales respecto a su labor científica (esto atado a lo llamado marca personal): The Kardashian index: a measure of discrepant social media profile for scientists https://t.co/sh7snZUS8A
I didn't know about this, did you @OdedRechavi?
RT @acnavascalixto: @julianop_a @OrnithoAle Nop https://t.co/ReKdzseTHm
RT @acnavascalixto: @julianop_a @OrnithoAle Nop https://t.co/ReKdzseTHm
En medio de mi crisis existencial de vida académica, me encuentro con este Tweet, acompañado de este artículo, https://t.co/ZbP3FI7v1T ante esto uno no sabe si reír o llorar. https://t.co/KL4yOeo9Yk
Yo sería el punto 0
@julianop_a @OrnithoAle Nop https://t.co/ReKdzseTHm
The Kardashian index: a measure of discrepant social media profile for scientists - Genome Biology https://t.co/HV2vY9PoIn
"The Kardashian index: a measure of discrepant social media profile for scientists" — a real paper from 2014 https://t.co/Oz0Jq2fUDw
https://t.co/TJNWzRZ3Hk
How is your K-index!! https://t.co/crFwrFL5mb https://t.co/NN98IlDQrw
RT @healthnewsch: The Kardashian index: a measure of discrepant social media profile for scientists: https://t.co/AkJaiZleT3
The Kardashian index: a measure of discrepant social media profile for scientists: https://t.co/AkJaiZleT3
What are we reading in #HMIVirtual this week? "The Kardashian index: a measure of discrepant social media profile for scientists" by Neil Hall in @GenomeBiology #MedTwitter #MedEd @LaurenMazzurco @ShannonGlaser16 @KristopherSchr6 @TChanMD @ElaineAnes https://t.co/9zUPuFDhgt https://t.co/QDXJev2hJU
You learn something new everyday! The Kardashian index: a measure of discrepant social media profile for scientists | Genome Biology | Full Text https://t.co/98wJEl0CXJ
The Kardashian index: a measure of discrepant social media profile for scientists https://t.co/4uVTdKiICU
The #Kardashian index: a measure of discrepant social media profile for scientists. Do we have the same for tech industry analysts?!? It sounds like fun
The Kardashian index: a measure of discrepant social media profile for scientists https://t.co/vhiJ399FZ5
And yes, I did click on the link to ref 10, The Kardashian index: a measure of discrepant social media profile for scientists by @neilhall_uk, and I calculated my K index to be about 2.5, but I'm not sure if that's good or bad!
The Kardashian index: a measure of discrepant social media profile for scientists (para recordar) https://t.co/vPJYQ67bJx
@BorisChaumette @NicolasRainteau @guillaumefond @CfpNathalie Oubliez le H Index, the Kardashian index is the new thing https://t.co/T2m4fPMP5G
The Kardashian index: a measure of discrepant social media profile for scientists | Genome Biology | Full Text Me encanta el paper!!! Mi Índice Kardashian es 0,2, todavía me sirve el coco para publicar bien, gracias followers!!! https://t.co/r4KDd2hlq2
The Kardashian index: a measure of discrepant social media profile for scientists | Genome Biology | Full Text https://t.co/OXNwy0lfaN
@o_guest "The Kardashian index: a measure of discrepant social media profile for scientists" (found through @minimalproc): https://t.co/epHMskDjgh https://t.co/91AvXiJGwk
The Kardashian index: a measure of discrepant social media profile for scientists https://t.co/vPJYQ67bJx
The Kardashian index: a measure of discrepant social media profile for scientists हाम्रा सार्प , छाईरहने , ईमप्रम्टू , सदाबहार ट्विटरका ईन्सटाइनटेनियस बैज्ञानिकहरूका किम कार्दासिन ईनडेक्स कसैले निकालिसके त छैनन नि ?
The Kardashian index: a measure of discrepant social media profile for scientists https://t.co/gOVBqCiEDi
@malco_barrett @Epi_D_Nique @kareem_carr @EpiEllie @FaustoBustos @lisabodnar @nabuelezam @epi_twit Tangent. Difficult to believe there is an actual paper that proposed this Kardashian index..... in a scientific journal.... with 97 citation.... https://t.co/l3Ct1TX1eA
Original paper: Hall, N. (2014). The Kardashian index: a measure of discrepant social media profile for scientists. Genome biology, 15(7), 424. https://t.co/uU9yToQC3U
The Kardashian index: a measure of discrepant social media profile for scientists. Mine is 4.32, so it’s less than the proposed cut off of 5: “if your K-index gets above 5, then it’s time to get off Twitter and write those papers.” https://t.co/Cgft7LZhCg
…the ‘Kardashian Index’, a measure of discrepancy between a scientist’s social media profile and publication record based on the direct comparison of numbers of citations and Twitter followers https://genomebiology.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13059-014-0424-0
RT @CoyneoftheRealm: The #Kardashian index: a measure of discrepant social media profile for scientists. https://t.co/ZcT2K5yRU3
The Kardashian index: a measure of discrepant social media profile for scientists; by Neil Hall https://t.co/rYaLpPbV8I
RT @CoyneoftheRealm: The #Kardashian index: a measure of discrepant social media profile for scientists. https://t.co/ZcT2K5yRU3
元論文はこちら。 “Published: 30 July 2014” けっこう前の論文が最近また取り上げられた感じなんですかね。 The Kardashian index: a measure of discrepant social media profile for scientists. Genome Biology. 2014 15:424 https://t.co/PzKGamgoHj
RT @Amandality: The Kardashian index: a measure of discrepant social media profile for scientists https://t.co/LVPCRVJIAp @BeierLab - wonde…
RT @Amandality: The Kardashian index: a measure of discrepant social media profile for scientists https://t.co/LVPCRVJIAp @BeierLab - wonde…
RT @Amandality: The Kardashian index: a measure of discrepant social media profile for scientists https://t.co/LVPCRVJIAp @BeierLab - wonde…
The Kardashian index: a measure of discrepant social media profile for scientists https://t.co/LVPCRVJIAp @BeierLab - wonder what your Kardashian index is?
Lol, the Kardashian index https://genomebiology.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13059-014-0424-0?fbclid=IwAR0RYeqYEMeYvlrFUrk2rqelrHrk8Hot-8Z8vfHFI03GEIpGh3vNJOMv4lA
Kardashian index: proposed measure to balance social media & paper output of scientists. Where are you on the plot? https://genomebiology.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13059-014-0424-0
The Kardashian index: a measure of discrepant social media profile for scientists Via @psirides http://genomebiology.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13059-014-0424-0