NEJM Evidence

@NEJMEvidence · Boston · joined 06 Aug 2021

NEJM Evidence, a journal from NEJM Group, presents innovative Original Research and fresh, bold ideas in Clinical Trial design and clinical decision-making.

31 402Followers

1 586Following

3 594Posts total

12.7KViews on collected posts

Latest posts

NEJM Evidence@NEJMEvidence15 Sep

“Among patients with COPD and no clinically manifest cardiovascular disease, metoprolol did not statistically significantly improve the time to a composite outcome of COPD exacerbation, cardiovascular events, or death from any cause.” Learn more: https://t.co/5oWSTLO43Q https://t

$A forest plot of subgroup analyses comparing Metoprolol and Standard Care. Subgroups listed include resting heart rate (\x3C80 and ≥80 beats/min), GOLD stages (III-IV and I-II), and primary end points (PP and ITT).$

916 views · 2 likes · 0 reposts · 0 replies Open on X →

NEJM Evidence@NEJMEvidence11 Sep

Stats, STAT: Logistic Regression https://t.co/R3gQF6xc9R #Statistics #MedEd https://t.co/ktKY8GsYsT

GIF

1.7K views · 14 likes · 4 reposts · 0 replies Open on X →

NEJM Evidence@NEJMEvidence9 Sep

𝐉𝐮𝐬𝐭 𝐩𝐮𝐛𝐥𝐢𝐬𝐡𝐞𝐝! Original Article by A. Dauber et al.: A Phase 3 Trial of Vosoritide in Children with Hypochondroplasia https://t.co/M45Y3z4hdT #ESPE2026 | @EuroSPE https://t.co/1CNV8AN3Nc

5.6K views · 7 likes · 4 reposts · 0 replies Open on X →

NEJM Evidence@NEJMEvidence6 Sep

Editorial by R. Chad Wade, MD, and Mark T. Dransfield, MD: Beta-Blockers in COPD — Getting to the Heart of the Issue https://t.co/Yukh8f3ynd #ERSCongress | @EuroRespSoc https://t.co/osOI7iZTos

2.1K views · 20 likes · 3 reposts · 0 replies Open on X →

NEJM Evidence@NEJMEvidence1 Jul

@NEJMEvidence Interesting study methodology in testing clinician decision-making. Using fictional vignettes with varying test result presentations can provide insights into diagnostic accuracy and cognitive biases. How do you think these varying presentations affect clinical prac 38 views · 0 likes · 0 reposts · 0 replies Open on X →

NEJM Evidence@NEJMEvidence30 Jun

A new trial tested clinicians’ performance on fictional case vignettes in which test results were presented with a single threshold, binary test characteristics, or interval likelihood ratio test characteristics across a range of values. Learn more: https://t.co/W7rfafepQo https:

2.4K views · 17 likes · 7 reposts · 1 replies Open on X →

Against accounts of the same size

6 posts from the last 90 days, next to the 10K–100K follower range. shown widely, but few of those viewers react.

Median views1 914this account918median for 10K–100K

Reach, %6.10%this account3.39%median for 10K–100K

Engagement, %0.63%this account1.53%median for 10K–100K

Metric	This account	Median for 10K–100K	Ratio
Median views per post	1 914	918	2.09×
Reach (views ÷ followers)	6.10%	3.39%	1.80×
Engagement rate	0.63%	1.53%	0.41×

Others in this range → Compare with another account → How these benchmarks are built →

Growth & engagement

How the posts we collected actually performed: views and reaction rate post by post, what the audience did with them, and where the follower count goes.

Views per post

2.4K30 Jun

381 Jul

2.1K6 Sep

5.6K9 Sep

1.7K11 Sep

91615 Sep

Last 6 collected posts, oldest on the left. The scale is logarithmic: one post can outrun the rest a hundred times over.

Engagement rate per post

1.05%30 Jun

0.00%1 Jul

1.07%6 Sep

0.20%9 Sep

1.07%11 Sep

0.22%15 Sep

Reactions — likes, reposts, replies and quotes — divided by views. Median for 10K–100K accounts is 1.53%.

What the audience does

Likes60.0%60 in total

Reposts18.0%18 in total

Replies1.0%1 in total

Bookmarks21.0%21 in total

Share of every reaction we collected for this account. Replies mean argument, reposts mean endorsement, bookmarks mean the post was worth keeping.

The follower curve appears once this account has two daily snapshots — we take one a day, and this one is on its first.