Back to @CMichaelGibson's profile

C. Michael Gibson MD engagement report

@CMichaelGibson - 430K followers on X

Measured over 52 original posts from a 30-day window, last computed on August 30, 2026.

Engagement

Bottom quarter for its size
Per follower
0.005%
of 430K followers
Per impression
0.857%
2.5K views on a typical post
Reach
0.57%
of its followers see a post
Typical post
21
interactions (median)
Saved
0.082%
2 bookmarks on a typical post
Posting rate
1.9/day
active 17% of days
Peak time
09:00 UTC
Saturday

A typical post picks up 21 interactions against 430K followers, an engagement rate of 0.005%. Measured over 52 original posts, its engagement rate beats 22% of 3,810 tracked accounts of a similar size. That is a reason to look at how the audience behaves - reply depth, saves, whether the followers are recent - rather than a conclusion about it on its own. Posts are seen about 2.5K times each, and 0.857% of those impressions turn into an interaction. That is about 0.57% of the follower count, which is the gap between an audience on paper and an audience in a timeline. Posting runs at about 1.9 posts a day over the last 30 days, though only 17% of days saw any activity at all. Most posts go out around 09:00 UTC, and Saturday is the busiest day of the week. Of the 52 posts sampled, 98% carry an image or video and 75% link out. The account's strongest tracked post pulled 4.5K interactions, about 214x its own typical post. Recurring topics include #baiminstitute, #cardiology, #clinicalresearch.

Measured over 52 original posts from a 30-day window, last computed on August 30, 2026. Recurring tags: #baiminstitute, #cardiology, #clinicalresearch.

Compared with accounts its own size

C. Michael Gibson MD's engagement rate beats 22% of the tracked X accounts closest to it in follower count (3,810 accounts, accounts of similar size (decile 7 of 10)). A percentile is spread evenly by construction, so 50 really is the middle of that group and 90 really is its top tenth.

On engagement per impression rather than per follower it beats 46% of the same group. When those two numbers disagree, the gap is about how far its posts travel rather than how people react to them.

Where this sits in the catalog

At 0.005%, C. Michael Gibson MD sits above the 10th percentile of the 36,960 accounts in this comparison. That places it in the bottom 25% band, which runs below 0.012%.

p100.002%
p250.012%
p50 (median)0.08%
p750.435%
p902.10%
p99159.8%
Engagement rate as a share of followers, across the 36,960 accounts we have scanned enough to measure. The axis is logarithmic, because the top and bottom of this population are about 106,518 times apart and a linear axis would flatten everything below the median into a single point.
Show the percentile table
Engagement rate percentiles
PercentileEngagement rate
10th percentile0.002%
25th percentile0.012%
50th percentile0.08%
75th percentile0.435%
90th percentile2.10%
99th percentile159.8%

This ruler is the whole measured catalog, not a size-matched group: it shows where the raw rate falls across every account we can measure, all of which are large. For a like-for-like comparison, read the size-band percentile above instead. See how the bands are built

Posting timing

This account posts most often around 09:00 UTC, and Saturday is its busiest day of the week. The bars below are the catalog-wide pattern, with this account's own busiest slot marked. They do not show how this account performs at each hour: we keep one aggregate per account, not one per hour, so that measurement does not exist in our data.

Engagement by hour posted, UTCTwenty-four bars, one per UTC hour. Each bar shows how posts published in that hour compare with their own authors' median engagement. Bars above the centre line ran higher than the median, bars below ran lower. A marker flags Busiest hour: 09:00 UTC.
0003060912151821
Above the authors' own mediansBelowScale: plus or minus 6%Busiest hour: 09:00 UTC
Show engagement by hour posted, utc as a table
Engagement by hour posted, UTC
Hour (UTC)Vs author medianPosts
00:00 UTC-1%51K
01:00 UTC-2%52K
02:00 UTC-3%51K
03:00 UTC-4%54K
04:00 UTC-6%44K
05:00 UTC-4%42K
06:00 UTC-4%49K
07:00 UTC-5%53K
08:00 UTC-4%61K
09:00 UTC-3%70K
10:00 UTC-2%73K
11:00 UTC-3%79K
12:00 UTC-2%87K
13:00 UTC-2%96K
14:00 UTC-4%99K
15:00 UTC-2%102K
16:00 UTC-3%99K
17:00 UTC-2%92K
18:00 UTC-1%85K
19:00 UTC-2%80K
20:00 UTC-1%75K
21:00 UTC-1%67K
22:00 UTC-2%58K
23:00 UTC-1%52K
Engagement by day of weekSeven bars, one per weekday, Sunday first. Each bar shows how posts published on that day compare with their own authors' median engagement. Bars above the centre line ran higher than the median, bars below ran lower. A marker flags Busiest day: Saturday.
SunMonTueWedThuFriSat
Above the authors' own mediansBelowScale: plus or minus 5%Busiest day: Saturday
Show engagement by day of week as a table
Engagement by day of week
DayVs author medianPosts
Sunday+5%233K
Monday0%292K
Tuesday-3%284K
Wednesday-1%253K
Thursday-2%246K
Friday-3%255K
Saturday+3%229K
See what moves engagement across the whole catalogWhat counts as a good engagement rate at this size

Best tweets

  • Mar 29, 2020214x their median

    “The Last Shift” Oil on clay covered wood board by C. Michael Gibson 2020. Welcome home to all of our courageous #CoronaHeroes who made the ultimate sacrifice 🙏💙 #cmgsees #COVID19 https://t.co/lg9GBLq4Ps

    3.3K804289100View on X
  • Aug 28, 202611x their median

    SINGLE-AF trial: In patients with atrial fibrillation and intermediate stroke risk, DOAC therapy lowered the risk of net adverse clinical events (stroke, systemic embolism, major bleeding, or CV death) compared to no anticoagulation at 24 months. View slides here: https://t.co/b36rhC1emf

    1723031852K viewsView on X
  • Aug 29, 20264.4x their median

    EPIDAURUS trial: In patients with AF and ACS, dual antithrombotic therapy with DOAC and intensified P2Y12-inhibition with prasugrel or ticagrelor for 1 month was associated with a higher bleeding risk without reducing ischemic events compared to triple antithrombotic therapy. Download slides here: https://t.co/i24tXyvKfP

    7021115.0K viewsView on X
  • Aug 27, 20264.4x their median

    We’re heading to ESC! 🇪🇺❤️ Please join Baim faculty throughout ESC this year as they share their expertise and present new research. We’re proud to have so many members of the Baim community participating in this year’s meeting. Follow along as we highlight their presentations and contributions throughout ESC! See you soon in Munich. @scottdsolomon @gabrielsteg @CBallantyneMD @lamcardio @ProfKausikRay @DrMarthaGulati @PamTaubMD #BaimInstitute #Cardiology #ClinicalResearch

    7814017.4K viewsView on X
  • Aug 29, 20263.8x their median

    ENRICH-AF trial: In AF patients with prior ICH, edoxaban did not lower stroke or systemic embolism but increased major bleeding compared to non-anticoagulant therapy. Download slides here: https://t.co/30E9SFdhLj https://t.co/smHqPAwQ8Q

    5822005.1K viewsView on X
  • Aug 29, 20263.7x their median

    AIR-STEMI trial: Among STEMI patients with multivessel coronary artery disease, physiology-guided complete revascularization reduced the primary composite endpoint of death, MI, CVA, or ischemia-driven revascularization compared to angiography-guided strategy. Download slides here: https://t.co/IMpCTxtOZy

    5819004.1K viewsView on X
  • Aug 29, 20262.9x their median

    A-CLOSE trial: For high ischemic risk patients 12 months after DES implantation, clopidogrel monotherapy was non-inferior to extended DAPT for net adverse clinical events at 2 years, with reduced bleeding but increased ischemic risk. Download slides here: https://t.co/37goHQUBdd https://t.co/bwEuI0VZDv

    4515003.4K viewsView on X
  • Aug 28, 20262.7x their median

    ACACIA-HCM trial: Aficamten significantly improved health status, peak oxygen uptake, and symptoms at 36 weeks in patients with symptomatic nonobstructive HCM. View slides here: https://t.co/vJ4OvX7DJo https://t.co/yCQX053Ms6

    4314003.3K viewsView on X
  • Aug 26, 20262.7x their median

    Multiple independent analyses by researchers ensures the integrity of results. While journals require that the authors "have access to the data" authors often use data analyzed by others and not themselves. "Editors and reviewers need to decide whether authors should be permitted to outsource important analytic decisions." https://t.co/6h6S5BrS7y

    4293213K viewsView on X
  • Aug 29, 20262.6x their median

    I’m honored to deliver the keynote lecture, “The Future of Cardiology,” at the Bayer Innovators Evening during ESC Congress 2026 in Munich on Sunday, August 30. I look forward to discussing the innovations, technologies, and ideas that are shaping the future of cardiovascular care — and to exchanging perspectives with colleagues from around the world. #BaimInstitute #ClinicalResearch #Cardiology

    447302.7K viewsView on X

Ranked by total interactions across everything we have tracked for this account, which is a longer history than the 30-day window the rates above use. The multiple compares each post to this account's own median.

Recurring topics

#baiminstitute#cardiology#clinicalresearch#esccongress#esccongress2026

The most frequent hashtags in the sampled posts. They describe what this account writes about; they are not a performance signal, and the catalog-wide breakdown on the hub shows how little hashtag count moves.

Buy or sell X accounts - escrow-protected

PlayerSells is an escrow marketplace for X accounts. Every deal is protected, with no middleman risk.

Reading these numbers

A typical post picks up 21 interactions against 430K followers, an engagement rate of 0.005%. Measured over 52 original posts, its engagement rate beats 22% of 3,810 tracked accounts of a similar size. That is a reason to look at how the audience behaves - reply depth, saves, whether the followers are recent - rather than a conclusion about it on its own. Posts are seen about 2.5K times each, and 0.857% of those impressions turn into an interaction. That is about 0.57% of the follower count, which is the gap between an audience on paper and an audience in a timeline. Posting runs at about 1.9 posts a day over the last 30 days, though only 17% of days saw any activity at all. Most posts go out around 09:00 UTC, and Saturday is the busiest day of the week. Of the 52 posts sampled, 98% carry an image or video and 75% link out. The account's strongest tracked post pulled 4.5K interactions, about 214x its own typical post. Recurring topics include #baiminstitute, #cardiology, #clinicalresearch.

What is C. Michael Gibson MD's engagement rate on X?
C. Michael Gibson MD (@CMichaelGibson) has an engagement rate of 0.005%, based on the median interactions across 52 original posts from the last 30 days against 429,519 followers. Replies, reposts and quote-posts of other people are excluded from that sample.
Is that a good engagement rate?
At 0.005%, C. Michael Gibson MD sits above the 10th percentile of the 36,960 accounts in this comparison. Those comparison accounts are all large ones, because our scanning cadence is weighted towards big accounts, so this is a ranking among peers of similar scale rather than a ranking across X.
Does @CMichaelGibson have real engagement?
Its engagement rate beats 22% of the tracked X accounts closest to it in follower count (3,810 accounts), which puts it in the bottom quarter for its size group. Ranking inside a size band matters because engagement rate falls as accounts grow, so a raw rate would mostly re-measure the follower count. It is a starting point for a look at follower quality, not a verdict on it.
When does @CMichaelGibson post?
Most posts go out around 09:00 UTC, and Saturday is its busiest day, at roughly 1.9 posts per day across the measured window.

Keep going