Social media presence of otolaryngology journals: The past, present, and future

Examining the Effectiveness of Social Media for the Dissemination of Research Evidence for Health and Social Care Practitioners: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Social media use has potential to facilitate the rapid dissemination of research evidence to busy health and social care practitioners.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to quantitatively synthesize evidence of the between- and within-group effectiveness of social media for dissemination of research evidence to health and social care practitioners. It also compared effectiveness between different social media platforms, formats, and strategies.

METHODS

We searched electronic databases for articles in English that were published between January 1, 2010, and January 10, 2023, and that evaluated social media interventions for disseminating research evidence to qualified, postregistration health and social care practitioners in measures of reach, engagement, direct dissemination, or impact. Screening, data extraction, and risk of bias assessments were carried out by at least 2 independent reviewers. Meta-analyses of standardized pooled effects were carried out for between- and within-group effectiveness of social media and comparisons between platforms, formats, and strategies. Certainty of evidence for outcomes was assessed using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations) framework.

RESULTS

In total, 50 mixed-quality articles that were heterogeneous in design and outcome were included (n=9, 18% were randomized controlled trials [RCTs]). Reach (measured in number of practitioners, impressions, or post views) was reported in 26 studies. Engagement (measured in likes or post interactions) was evaluated in 21 studies. Direct dissemination (measured in link clicks, article views, downloads, or altmetric attention score) was analyzed in 23 studies (8 RCTs). Impact (measured in citations or measures of thinking and practice) was reported in 13 studies. Included studies almost universally indicated effects in favor of social media interventions, although effect sizes varied. Cumulative evidence indicated moderate certainty of large and moderate between-group effects of social media interventions on direct dissemination (standardized mean difference [SMD] 0.88; P=.02) and impact (SMD 0.76; P<.001). After social media interventions, cumulative evidence showed moderate certainty of large within-group effects on reach (SMD 1.99; P<.001), engagement (SMD 3.74; P<.001), and direct dissemination (SMD 0.82; P=.004) and low certainty of a small within-group effect on impacting thinking or practice (SMD 0.45; P=.02). There was also evidence for the effectiveness of using multiple social media platforms (including Twitter, subsequently rebranded X; and Facebook), images (particularly infographics), and intensive social media strategies with frequent, daily posts and involving influential others. No included studies tested the dissemination of research evidence to social care practitioners.

CONCLUSIONS

Social media was effective for disseminating research evidence to health care practitioners. More intense social media campaigns using specific platforms, formats, and strategies may be more effective than less intense interventions. Implications include recommendations for effective dissemination of research evidence to health care practitioners and further RCTs in this field, particularly investigating the dissemination of social care research.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

PROSPERO International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews CRD42022378793; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=378793.

INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID)

RR2-10.2196/45684.

#OtoTwitter: The Top 75 Twitter Influencers in Otolaryngology and Association With Academic Impact

OBJECTIVES

Social media has enabled discussion of relevant topics within otolaryngology. With increasing academic discourse occurring on virtual platforms, it is important to examine who is influencing these discussions. This study thus aims to: (1) identify the top Twitter influencers in otolaryngology and (2) assess the relationship between Twitter influence and academic impact.

STUDY DESIGN

Cross-sectional analysis.

SETTING

Twitter.

METHODS

The Right Relevance program was used to identify and rank the top 75 Twitter influencers, excluding organizations, according to the search terms "otolaryngology," "head and neck surgery," "ear nose throat," "rhinology," "head and neck," "laryngology," "facial plastics," and "otology." Demographic data and h-index were collected for each influencer. Correlational analyzes were performed to assess the relationships between Twitter rank and geographic location, sex, subspecialty, and h-index.

RESULTS

The majority of the top 75 influencers were otolaryngologists (87%), female (68%), and located in the United States (61%). General otolaryngology (n = 20, 31%) was more well-represented than any individual subspecialty including facial plastics (n = 10, 15%), rhinology (n = 10, 15%), and neurotology (n = 9, 14%). There was a significant relationship between Twitter rank and h-index (Spearman ρ value of -0.32; 95% confidence interval: -0.51 to -0.01; P = .006). Twitter rank was not significantly correlated with subspecialty, sex, or geographic location (P > .05).

CONCLUSION

The majority of Twitter influencers within otolaryngology were otolaryngologists, female, and located in the United States. Social media influence is positively associated with academic impact among otolaryngologists.

Effective Use of Twitter by Orthopaedic Sports Medicine Journals Can Result in Increased Impact Factor

Purpose

To determine whether activity on Twitter was correlated with increasing impact factor (IF) among 6 orthopaedic sports medicine journals.

Methods

Twitonomy software was used to collect account activity for the American Journal of Sports Medicine; Arthroscopy: The Journal of Arthroscopic and Related Surgery; Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy; Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery; Orthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine; and Sports Health. Data from 2000 to 2020 were collected. Each journal's annual IF score was collected via scijournal.org. A multivariate regression model was used to predict the influence of different Twitter metrics on IF from 2012 to 2019. The journal name, number of tweets, and interaction of the two were used to predict IF. Additionally, Pearson correlation was used to assess correlations between Twitter account metrics and IF.

Results

Over the study period, all IFs increased, with the exception of that for American Journal of Sports Medicine. The effect size between number of tweets and IF was not the same for each journal. For every additional tweet, American Journal of Sports Medicine increased its IF by 0.001 (P = .18). Sports Health and Orthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine increased their IF by 0.01 (P = .002) and 0.022 (P < .001), respectively. Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy would expect a decrease in its IF by 0.004 (P = .55) and Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery and Arthroscopy would increase its IF by 0.002 (P = .71) and 0.001 (P = .99), but this was not significant. There was a statistically significant positive correlation between annual tweets and IF across all journals.

Conclusions

Markers of Twitter account activity, specifically the number of annual tweets, were predictive of an increase in IF among the orthopedic sports medicine journals included in this study.

Clinical Relevance

The findings of this study may allow orthopaedic sports medicine journals to make more effective, targeted, and productive use of their social media accounts to reach a broader audience, increase their influence, and increase the IF of their journal.

Social Media and Academic Impact: Do Early Tweets Correlate with Future Citations?

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to determine whether social media platforms (SMPs) can influence article impact as measured by citations.

METHODS

This is a cross-sectional study that analyzed articles published in the top ten otolaryngology journals by the Eigenfactor score in January 2015. Total accumulated twitter mentions and citations were recorded in 2021. The main outcomes examined the difference in citations, tweets, article types, and author counts accumulated over a 5-year period for all articles that were either tweeted or non-tweeted.

RESULTS

3094 articles were included for analysis. The average article was cited 11.2 ± 13.2 times and tweeted 2.10 ± 4.0 times. Sixty-four percent of the articles had at least one tweet. Over the study period, there was a statistically significant difference in mean number of citations between tweeted articles (12.1 ± 15.0) vs non-tweeted articles (9.6 ± 10.5) citations, representing a 26% difference (P < .001). Review articles had the highest mean citations (19.4 ± 23.4), while editorials had the lowest mean citations (2.8 ± 6.9). Tweets peaked in the year of publication, but citations continued to rise in the subsequent years. Tweeted articles' peak citation rate change was +1.27 mean citations per year, compared to +.99 mean citations per year in non-tweeted articles. The mean author count in tweeted articles (5.40 ± 3.1) was not significantly different than mean author count in non-tweeted articles (5.19 ± 2.65, P = .0794).

CONCLUSION

These data suggest a moderate correlation between tweets and article citations, but a clear difference in the number of citations in articles tweeted vs those with no tweets. Thus, dissemination of knowledge may be impacted by social media platforms such as Twitter.

Social Media Utilization in Otolaryngology: A Scoping Review

OBJECTIVE

Social media (SM) is an increasingly popular medium for the medical community to engage with patients, trainees, and colleagues. This review aimed to identify reported uses of SM in otolaryngology-head and neck surgery (OHNS), assess the quality of evidence supporting these uses, and identify gaps in the literature. With the relative lack of regulatory guidelines for the development of SM content, we hypothesized that the quality of content available on SM would be highly variable.

DATA SOURCES AND METHODS

A scoping review was performed of English-language peer-reviewed studies published to date discussing SM use in any form within OHNS. Three reviewers independently screened all abstracts. Two reviewers independently extracted data of interest from the full text of articles identified from the preliminary abstract screen.

RESULTS

171 studies were included, with 94 (54.9%) studies published between 2020 and 2022. 104 (60.8%) studies were conducted in the US. 135 (78.9%) used cross-sectional or survey-based methodology; only 7 (4.1%) were controlled studies. SM was most commonly employed for professional networking (n = 37 [21%]), and within subspecialties of otology (n = 38 [22%]) and rhinology/allergy (n = 25 [15%]). Facebook was most frequently used for study recruitment (n = 23 [13.5%]), YouTube for patient education (n = 15 [14.6%]), and Twitter for professional networking (n = 16 [9.4%]).

CONCLUSION

SM use within OHNS is increasing rapidly, with applications including patient education, professional networking, and study recruitment. Despite myriad articles, there remains a paucity of well-controlled studies. As SM becomes integrated into healthcare, particularly for applications directly impacting patient care, higher levels of evidence are needed to understand its true impact. Laryngoscope, 133:2447-2456, 2023.

To tweet or not to tweet in otorhinolaryngology, that is the question

OBJECTIVE

To describe the scientific medical literature devoted to the various interactions between otorhinolaryngology (ORL) and social networks.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A literature search, conducted on December 15, 2021, using the search engine of the United States National Library of Medicine (PubMed) and the key-words "otorhinolaryngology", "social network", and "Twitter", retrieved 321 articles for which Abstracts were read for selection of articles with qualitative and quantitative data regarding the various relationships between ORL and social media.

RESULTS

Forty-four articles were selected and analyzed. Thirty-nine originated from the USA and none from France or French-speaking countries. Only 1 article was a prospective randomized study. Schematically, two main types of publication were identified. The first dealt with user interactions, topics discussed, teaching of the ORL specialty and publicizing research. The second dealt with the limits and dangers of this new means of publicizing scientific thinking in our specialty. Reading these articles highlighted the role of social media in publicizing ORL research, and suggested distinct options to improve interactions between otorhinolaryngologists, patients and society as a whole.

CONCLUSION

At a time when society is demanding rapid access to medical research findings, just as it is mandatory to master and adhere to the rules for medical writing in research, it is also now necessary to learn how to communicate via social media and send a tweet if one wishes to publicize its research and/or exchange with patients.

A Scoping Review of Physician Advocacy on Twitter

Twitter has been adopted by physicians across most medical specialties; it allows for the wide dissemination of information and calls to action, brings new stakeholders into collations, promotes academic engagement, and fosters collaboration between academia and private practice. In this review of the literature, we briefly outline the state of advocacy in health care and summarize current Twitter-based advocacy efforts in the major specialties of health care, identifying both successful strategies as well as gaps in Twitter advocacy research. Relevant articles were obtained via PubMed and Google Scholar searches using the phrases "Twitter advocacy healthcare," "[specialty name] Twitter" and "[specialty name] Twitter advocacy." Several overarching themes were found to be widely utilized in specialty-specific discussions of Twitter advocacy efforts: organizing under a specific hashtag, fostering dialogue between stakeholders, and tweeting using personalized, action-oriented language. Fields such as pediatrics, heme/onc, ENT, and ophthalmology have most thoroughly embraced the desire to learn how to most effectively advocate on Twitter. Other fields such as OBGYN, cardiology, and surgery have less academic focus on online advocacy. Outside of advocacy efforts, the research and academic benefits of Twitter are well described in nearly every specialty. In conclusion, while clinicians are encouraged to advocate online, only broad strategies for online engagement are currently offered. Additional research into the details of how to successfully create an online profile and Twitter presence is needed to ensure all physicians are able to maximize their advocacy efforts, with clarification of the goals and objectives of this engagement also required.

Tweeting for Success: The Role of Twitter in Enhancing SCImago Journal Rank for Specialty Surgical Journals

Background The cornerstone of surgical education and practice is the surgical journal, but the ability to disperse the vital information within their pages had previously been limited. The use of Twitter by surgical journals has increased in recent years and has allowed these journals to reach a wider audience than they previously could. In this article, we discuss the role Twitter engagement has on a journal's impact factor, visibility, and prestige. Methods The authors compiled a list of journals using the SciMago Journal and Country rank platform. Included journals' Twitter profiles were then assessed using Twitonomy, an online platform that collects and processes data regarding individual Twitter profiles. Statistical analysis was conducted to determine the relationship between Twitter use and SCImago Journal Rank (SJR). Results Simple linear regression and multiple linear regression models determined that the only variables that had a statistically significant impact on all journals were the age of the Twitter account (p=0.003) and the percentage of retweets (p=0.001). When it comes to specialty-specific journals, further analysis showed that the only significant factor regarding its impact on SJR was the percentage of retweets (p=0.007). Conclusions Surgical journals' regular use of Twitter is important in the dissemination of important information to a wide audience. This article shows that the most important variable to determine the impact and visibility of a surgical journal is the percentage of retweets. Further research should be performed to better understand how to use Twitter and other social media platforms to reach a larger audience.

#Ophthalmology: Social Media Utilization and Impact in Ophthalmology Journals, Professional Societies, and Eye Health Organizations

Aim

To evaluate and quantify social media presence of ophthalmology peer-reviewed journals, professional societies, and eye health organizations, and to determine if there is a correlation between social media utilization and Twitter engagement metrics or journal impact measures.

Methods

We searched for online profiles of 100 ophthalmology peer-reviewed journals, 333 professional ophthalmology societies, and 40 eye health organizations on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram. Impact was quantified by recording the number of “likes” on Facebook and number of followers on Twitter and Instagram. We also used Twitonomy software to obtain advanced Twitter metrics for all journal accounts from 2018 to 2021, and compared to journal impact measured by SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) score, the h-index, and impact factor.

Results

Eye health organizations averaged significantly greater Facebooks “likes” and Twitter followers than both peer-reviewed journals and professional societies (p < 0.0001). Of 100 journals studied, 30% were active on Twitter, 25% on Facebook, and 6% on Instagram. Slightly more than half of all journal-affiliated social media accounts were accessible from the journal website. Among journals with active Twitter accounts, total followers, total tweets, average retweets, and average “favorites” were all significantly positively correlated with academic metrics such as the SJR, h-index, and/or impact factor.

Conclusion

Greater social media engagement is associated with higher ophthalmology journal impact metrics; however, ophthalmology journals and professional societies lag behind eye health organizations in social media engagement. Although unable to demonstrate causality, social media may be an underutilized visibility, communication, and dissemination tool.

The Digital Dilemma: Perspectives From Otolaryngology Residency Applicants on Social Media

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the impact of otolaryngology programs' social media on residency candidates in the 2020 to 2021 application cycle.

METHODS

An anonymous survey was distributed via Otomatch, Headmirror, and word of mouth to otolaryngology residency applicants in the 2021 Match. Survey items included demographics, social media usage, and impact of programs' social media on applicant perception and ranking. Descriptive statistics were performed, and responses based on demographic variables were compared using Fisher's exact and Mann-Whitney U tests.

RESULTS

Of 64 included respondents, nearly all (61/64, 95%) used Facebook, Instagram, and/or Twitter for personal and/or professional purposes. Applicants (59/64, 92%) most commonly researched otolaryngology residency programs on Instagram (55/59, 93%) and Twitter (36/59, 61%), with younger (P = .023) and female (P = .043) applicants being more likely to engage with programs on Instagram. Program accounts were most helpful in showcasing program culture (50/59, 85%) and highlighting its location (34/59, 58%). Nearly one third (19/59, 32%) reported that social media impacted their rank list. Age, gender, reapplication, home program status, or time taken off before and/or during medical school did not significantly influence social media's usefulness in the application cycle.

CONCLUSION

Social media platforms like Instagram and Twitter are frequently used by applicants to assess otolaryngology residency programs. Programs' social media accounts effectively demonstrate program culture and affect applicants' rank lists. As social media usage continues to rise in the medical community, these findings can help otolaryngology residency programs craft a beneficial online presence that aids in recruitment, networking, and education.

Relationship between internal medicine journals' activity on social networks and the citations they receive

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Social networks are a means for disseminating scientific information. Alternative metrics assessing the impact of scientific publications on social networks have been created. Our study aims to assess the correlation between the activity of internal medicine journals on social networks and traditional metrics based on citations.

METHODS

Internal medicine journals were identified in the SCImago-Scopus database and information on traditional impact metrics was extracted. In addition, alternative metrics of activity were determined for Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, and Instagram. The correlation was assessed through Spearman's correlation coefficient.

RESULTS

Of 134 Internal Medicine journals, 17 had a presence on the social networks evaluated. The SJR index was higher in journals with a presence on social networks vs. those without (59 vs. 18, p < .0001). The overall correlation between the SJR index and the number of followers/year was very strong for Facebook (Spearman's correlation coefficient 0.95, p < .05) and strong for Twitter (Spearman's correlation coefficient 0.54 p < .05).

CONCLUSIONS

Our study suggests that there is a very strong correlation between social network activity metrics (mainly Facebook and Twitter) compared to traditional metrics based on the number of citations of internal medicine journals.

Association Between Twitter Mentions and Academic Citations in Otolaryngology Literature

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the relationship between Twitter mentions and academic citations in otolaryngology literature.

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective cross-sectional analysis.

SETTING

Altmetric Twitter mention and Google Scholar citation rosters.

METHODS

Original research articles from 10 leading otolaryngology journals were assessed 26 months after print publication. Article Twitter mentions were tracked through the Altmetric Bookmarklet, and article citation data were determined through the Google Scholar search engine. Twitter mentions and citation metrics of articles were compared through 2-tailed t test analysis (P < .05).

RESULTS

Of all articles, 50.7% (152/300) had at least 1 Twitter mention. Of all article Twitter mentions, 25% (432/1758) happened within the first week of online publication dates, while 64% (1130/1758) occurred between online and print publication dates. Articles mentioned on Twitter had 1.6-fold more Google Scholar citations (8.6 ± 0.7, mean ± SD) than articles with no Twitter mentions (5.4 ± 0.4, P < .01). A total of 8% (24/300) of publications were tweeted by their authors. Articles self-tweeted by authors were associated with an 8.4-citation increase (14.8 ± 3.1) for Google Scholar when compared with articles not shared by their authors on Twitter (6.4 ± 0.4; 2.3-fold increase, P < .01).

CONCLUSION

Most otolaryngology articles are disseminated over Twitter, with greatest Twitter activity occurring before print publication date of articles. Citations within 2 years of release are positively associated with the number of mentions on Twitter. Article Twitter mentions may augment the academic influence of otolaryngology publications.

Shortcomings of Rapid Clinical Information Dissemination: Lessons From a Pandemic

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has led to an acceleration of clinical information dissemination to unprecedented speeds, a phenomenon only partially explained by formal efforts of the scientific community. These have ranged from the establishment of open-source platforms for review of article preprints to the elimination of journal paywalls for COVID-19-related publications. In addition, informal efforts that rely on various modern media platforms that promote, repackage, and synthesize information have played substantial adjunctive roles, many of which did not exist during the severe acute respiratory syndrome pandemic of 2003. Although these latter efforts have greatly bolstered the speed of knowledge dissemination, their unregulated nature subjects them to risk for facilitating the spread of misinformation. In our opinion, the role of modern media in influencing clinical knowledge dissemination was not adequately examined even before the pandemic and therefore remains largely unchecked. In this article, we examine the spread of information in the field of COVID-19 and neurologic disorders, develop a simple model that maps various modern media tools on to the dissemination pipeline, and critically examine its components. Through this exercise, we identify opportunities for the scientific community to regulate and safeguard the clinical knowledge dissemination process, with implications both for the pandemic and beyond.

The Use of Twitter by Medical Journals: Systematic Review of the Literature

BACKGROUND

Medical journals use Twitter to engage and disseminate their research articles and implement a range of strategies to maximize reach and impact.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to systematically review the literature to synthesize and describe the different Twitter strategies used by medical journals and their effectiveness on journal impact and readership metrics.

METHODS

A systematic search of the literature before February 2020 in four electronic databases (PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, and ScienceDirect) was conducted. Articles were reviewed using the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses) guidelines.

RESULTS

The search identified 44 original research studies that evaluated Twitter strategies implemented by medical journals and analyzed the relationship between Twitter metrics and alternative and citation-based metrics. The key findings suggest that promoting publications on Twitter improves citation-based and alternative metrics for academic medical journals. Moreover, implementing different Twitter strategies maximizes the amount of attention that publications and journals receive. The four key Twitter strategies implemented by many medical journals are tweeting the title and link of the article, infographics, podcasts, and hosting monthly internet-based journal clubs. Each strategy was successful in promoting the publications. However, different metrics were used to measure success.

CONCLUSIONS

Four key Twitter strategies are implemented by medical journals: tweeting the title and link of the article, infographics, podcasts, and hosting monthly internet-based journal clubs. In this review, each strategy was successful in promoting publications but used different metrics to measure success. Thus, it is difficult to conclude which strategy is most effective. In addition, the four strategies have different costs and effects on dissemination and readership. We recommend that journals and researchers incorporate a combination of Twitter strategies to maximize research impact and capture audiences with a variety of learning methods.

Otolaryngology Residency Program Rankings and Social Media Usage: A Longitudinal Analysis

OBJECTIVE

Social media is a powerful networking tool among health care organizations. This study determines correlations between program reputation and social media activity and popularity, specifically among otolaryngology residency programs.

METHODS

Accredited programs, excluding military and osteopathic, in the United States were included. Activity and popularity on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram were assessed during the same 7-month period from 2016 to 2020. Doximity Residency reputation scores (dividing programs into quartiles) and US News & World Report (comparing programs affiliated with top hospitals versus those with unranked hospitals) were utilized to compare differences based on reputation.

RESULTS

Of 104 programs, 91 (88%) had social media accounts. Instagram and Twitter were more commonly used than Facebook, with 78 (75%), 49 (47%), and 42 (40%) accounts, respectively. The cumulative use of all three platforms grew yearly, while Twitter (R²  = 0.9863) and Instagram (R²  = 0.9955) presence increased exponentially. Doximity's top quartile programs had more Facebook (P = .020), Twitter (P < .001), and Instagram (P = .102) accounts. First-quartile programs also adopted each platform months before fourth-quartile programs. Stratified by US News & World Report, ranked programs had more social media accounts, with 24 (53%) on Facebook (P = .028), 32 (71%) on Twitter (P < .001), and 37 (82%) on Instagram (P = .155). Programs with higher reputations were more active and exhibited increased likes and followers over time.

CONCLUSION

Social media use among otolaryngology programs has grown exponentially, with Instagram and Twitter becoming the dominant platforms. Higher ranked programs are more active on social media, have more followers, and adopt social media earlier.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level 4 Laryngoscope, 2021.

The importance of social media to the academic surgical literature: Relationship between Twitter activity and readership metrics

BACKGROUND

Social media has an increasing role within professional surgical practice, including the publishing and engagement of academic literature. This study aims to analyze the relationship between social media use and traditional and alternative metrics among academic surgical journals.

METHOD

Journals were identified through the InCites Journal Citation Reports 2019, and their impact factor, h-index, and CiteScore were noted. Social media platforms were examined, and Twitter activity interrogated between 1 January to 31 December 2019. Healthcare Social Graph score and an aggregated Altmetric Attention Score were also calculated for each journal. Statistical analysis was carried out to look at the correlation between traditional metrics, Twitter activity, and altmetrics.

RESULTS

Journals with a higher impact factor were more likely to use a greater number of social media platforms (R² = 0.648; P < .0001). Journals with dedicated Twitter profiles had a higher impact factor than journals without (median, 2.96 vs 1.88; Mann-Whitney U = 390; P < .001); however, over a 1-year period (2018-2019) having a Twitter presence did not alter impact factor (Mann-Whitney U = 744.5; P = .885). Increased Twitter activity was positively correlated with impact factor. Longitudinal analysis over 6 years suggested cumulative tweets correlated with an increased impact factor (R² = 0.324, P = .004). Novel alternative measures including Healthcare Social Graph score (R² = 0.472, P = .005) and Altmetric Attention Score (R² = 0.779, P = .001) positively correlated with impact factor.

CONCLUSION

Higher impact factor is associated with social media presence and activity, particularly on Twitter, with long-term activity being of particular importance. Modern alternative metrics correlate with impact factor. This relationship is complex, and future studies should look to understand this further.

Journal of Pediatric Surgery: Effects of an automated social media strategy for knowledge dissemination

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE

With increasing publications, it's hard to keep up with surgical literature. Social media is a valuable educational resource with global reach. We sought to analyze the impact of an automated social media strategy for the Journal of Pediatric Surgery (JPS).

METHODS

Analytics for March-August 2019 were retrospectively reviewed for automated posts using a SocialPilot queue from the journal's RSS feed. Descriptive and inferential statistics were utilized to analyze performance, including journal article views.

RESULTS

One hundred sixty-five posts amassed 512,316 impressions and 9,795 article views. Facebook had greater overall impact (p < 0.01). Twitter was stronger when adjusted by number of followers (p < 0.01). Engagements and article views had strong correlation between platforms (p < 0.01). Day of the week had limited impact. Photographs were the preferred content format (p < 0.05). Topic had the highest effect on performance (p < 0.05) - with colorectal, EA/TEF, and general pediatric surgery leading to higher reach and engagement. ECMO/CDH was the least popular. Comments and shares were negligible.

CONCLUSIONS

We reached 3,105 users, with 59 article views per post. Topic had the strongest effect on performance. For comparison, custom infographics reached 7,368 users and averaged 101 article views. Alternative knowledge dissemination strategies are likely needed to foster online discussion and build more robust forums for collaboration.

TYPE OF STUDY

Retrospective, Non-clinical Study.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III.

#Cleftlip/Palate: What Is the World Talking About?

Objective:

Studies have begun analyzing how the world converses on social media platforms about medical/surgical topics. This study’s objective was to examine how cleft lip and palate, two of the most common birth defects in the world, are discussed on the social media platform Twitter. No study to date has analyzed this topic.

Methods:

Tweets were identified using any of the following: cleft, cleft lip, cleft palate, #cleft, #cleftlip, #cleftpalate. Eight months between 2017 and 2018 were analyzed.

Main Outcome Measures:

The primary outcome was the tweet subject matter. Secondary outcomes were author characteristics, tweet engagement, multimedia, and tweet accuracy

Results:

A total of 1222 tweets were included. #Cleft was the most common hashtag (71%), and it was significantly associated with more retweets ( P = .03). Twenty-seven countries tweeted, with the United States (34%) and India (27%) producing the most. Charities (36%), hospitals (14%), and physicians (13%) were the most common authors. Over three-quarters of tweets were self-promotional. The top content included charity information (22%) and patients’ cleft stories (14%). Tweets about patient safety/care and surgical service trips generated the most engagement. The accuracy of educational tweets was 38% low accuracy and 1% inaccurate. One hundred forty-nine tweets (12%) discussed a published research article, but 41 tweets did not share a link.

Conclusions:

Charities dominate the cleft lip/palate “Twitterverse.” Most tweets were self-promotional, and over a third of educational tweets were low accuracy. As the cleft social media community continues to grow, we recommend using the hashtag #cleft to reach a wider audience.

Immunology and social networks: an approach towards impact assessment

Scientific journals have changed the mechanisms they use for distribution and dissemination of information. Different approaches towards determining impact have emerged and among these, metrics derived from activity on social media are an emerging trend. This article aims to assess whether a correlation exists between the traditional impact factor and activity on social media. We assessed journals categorized within the area of "immunology" on the SCImago Journal and Country Rank website. Variables reflecting traditional and alternative measures of impact were collected. Differences between journals with and without social networks were assessed using non-parametric Mann-Whitney U tests. Correlation was assessed through Spearman tests. 156 journals were analyzed, 17% had at least one social network. 48.2% of journals with social networks were classified within SJR's quartile 1. An almost perfect correlation was found between the SJR and the number of followers on Twitter, this correlation remained statistically significant after adjusting for time since creation of the account [Spearman's correlation (r_s) = 0.83]. We propose the use of Twitter as a mechanism for dissemination of information by immunology journals, as well as other social networks for their potential to increase their audience, as well as the dissemination and impact of their publications.

Evaluation of Social Media Presence of Otolaryngology Residency Programs in the United States

Importance

Over two-thirds of the adult population in the United States use Facebook. Despite the high interest in and use of social media by the general public, the presence and accessibility of health care organizations on social media has not yet been fully evaluated.

Objective

To determine the use and popularity of social media among otolaryngology residency programs in the United States.

Design, Setting, and Participants

A cross-sectional study of the presence of accredited otolaryngology residency programs in the United States in an internet data repository was conducted. Programs were stratified by Doximity Residency Navigator reputation rankings (dividing programs into quartiles) and US News & World Report (comparing programs affiliated with hospitals ranked in the top 50 vs programs affiliated with unranked hospitals). Social media sites and activity for each program were assessed using internet searches. The study was conducted in April 2017.

Results

Among 101 otolaryngology residency programs, 30 were found to have social media sites (29.7%). Facebook and Twitter were the most commonly used services, with 25 (24.8%) and 14 (13.9%) accounts, respectively. Based on Doximity Residency Navigator rankings, programs in the first quartile were more likely to have Facebook profiles than programs in the fourth quartile (42.3% vs 12.0%; absolute difference, 30%; 95% CI, 2.9% to 52.6%). First- and second-quartile programs showed increased Facebook activity. There was greater Twitter presence in first- vs fourth-quartile programs (19.2% vs 8.0%; absolute difference, 11.2%; 95% CI, -11.6% to 33.0%). Higher-quartile programs were more active on Twitter and exhibited increased numbers of likes and followers. Analysis of US News & World Report rankings revealed that ranked programs had higher rates of presence, activity, and popularity on both Facebook and Twitter. However, these were smaller differences than seen when comparing Doximity Residency Navigator rankings. Correlation between the 2 ranking systems was indicated (Spearman ρ = 0.59; 95% CI, 0.34 to 0.76).

Conclusions and Relevance

This study suggests that otolaryngology residency programs with higher Doximity Residency Navigator reputation rankings have a stronger presence on social media. Smaller trends were observed for programs in the top 50 US News & World Report rankings. Overall, social media use among otolaryngology programs seems relatively low, and this may present an opportunity to increase communication with the public via these technologies.

Changing trends in otorhinolaryngology publishing

The aim of this study is to compare the changes in impact factors and citation numbers of Open Access (OA) vs subscription-based (SB) journals between 1999 and 2016 and to explore the changing trends in ORL publishing. All data extracted from SCImago Journal and Country ranking (SJR) website have been used as input for statistical analysis. The chi-square test of independency was applied in order to understand whether the ratio of number of OA journals of ORL category have dramatically changed between years 1999 and 2016. Also, the years and impact factors of journals belonging to the OA and SB journals have been graphed separately and the changes of annual SJR ranks of both journal types have been compared using one-way Z-test. There was a significant difference as the proportion of OA Journals were not equal to the proportion of SB Journals throughout the years 1999 and 2016, and it showed the tendency to increase greater compared to SB Journals (p < 0.01). Although the overall level of impact factors of SB journals was generally high, by comparing two regression models, it was obvious that the level of increase of the impact factors of OA journals were significantly higher (p < 0.01). When choosing where to publish, it is important to consider the journal’s visibility, cost of publication, IF or SJR of the journal and speed of publication as well as changing trends in medical publishing nourished by the Web of Science.