OpenSocial Gadget Contest

Adding new features to Profiles and/or VIVO

Rewarding a Profilee's External Media Presence/Q Score by Adding "Mention Mapper" or Profilee Rating

Proposal Status: 

One way to further engage the profilees and encourage their media (online and traditional) interaction: Might we add links to media "mention mappers", which quantify social (and other) media appearances, similar to how Q Scores rate familiarity levels of brands, companies and individuals? A good prototype is the Klout influence scoring model. In this way, we could reward profilees for their high "influence" scores in external, non-UCSF media. We could also consider, in developing each profilee's rating, whether or not s/he has added his/her UCSF Profile to his/her LinkedIn or Facebook profile.

Examples:,,, NCRR site listing media mentions

In this way, we could imitate those user-oriented and crowdsourcing "help" forums like MS Developers' Network/MSDN, etc.). These sites reward members for frequency (or helpfulness) of responses by providing "points", "stars" or other indices. It would also advertise, to profilees, the benefits of profile maintenance and frequent external media appearances. This would be a minimally labor-intensive way to transfer to profilees partial ownership of the task of promoting their own profiles. By encouraging a larger media presence, we would also broaden outreach for the UCSF Profiles in general.


There are several interesting ideas listed here... how about putting them in as separate proposals? that will facilitate discussion on each one, not to mention increase your chances of winning.

Done - I've reposted what had been the additional ideas from this posting, into separate proposals. Thank you very much for your suggestion.

It would be interesting to have a discussion on this topic.  Although KNODE is not looking to invent anything like a numeric Klout score, we are working on a innovative mechanism for expert relevancy ranking.  When you search for a disease area or biomed term, in addition to traditional search relevancy, other factors like journal prestige, author positions, cross references, etc., etc. would be considered.

What a wonderful idea, an expert relevancy ranking. Those parameters sound great, especially the author position (first, second, etc.). Great idea!

Interesting idea. Are there any open APIs that provide these kind of research-related metrics at this time, in bulk and without end-user involvement? I like Impact Story, for example, but they require users to register one at a time.

You might also want to take your idea of tracking media mentions, and split that out into a media mentions gadget idea.

Thanks for the suggestion, Anirvan. I'm sorry that I wasn't able to pursue that until today, after the closure of the improvement phase.

Selected comments from Reviewer(s):

Reviewer 1: "I think this could be a big hit if done properly--a mechanism for quantifying and sharing internal and external media hits, blog posts, letters to the editor, etc.  There is a WHOLE bunch of these types of activities that do not get measured or acknowledged by promotions committees or department chairs, but which could be illuminating and rewarding.  I think to tag the "mention" or "post" with a "reach" factor of the number of people likely to see the item would also be pretty cool.  This is all advertising/marketing speak..."
Reviewer 2: "the idea is good but this may be a very complicated project in terms of vetting what's appropriate to add publicly..."

On behalf of Clinical and Translational Science Institute at UCSF, thank you for participating in this contest.

Commenting is closed.