Tweeting Authors: Impact on Research Publicity and Downstream Citations

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.

Physician-scientists or celebrities? Kardashian-index of gastroenterologists

BACKGROUND

The coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic unleashed a flood of untrustworthy information on social media platforms, resulting in the unfortunate consequence of expert scientists' opinions getting lost amidst the chaotic sea of misinformation. The question of how much influence these esteemed scientists hold on social media platforms remains elusive. To address this scientific quandary, we sought to explore the concept of the Kardashian index (K-index), a term introduced by Hall in 2014. This metric provides a rudimentary means of evaluating whether a physician scientist's popularity on social media aligns with their significant scientific contributions.

AIM

To evaluate if a Gastroenterologist physician's popularity on social media is at par with their scientific contributions (research articles and publications).

METHODS

We conducted an extensive search to identify all gastroenterologists actively practicing and associated with the top 100 hospitals as reported by the United States News. We collected specific data on a sub-group including their names, affiliations, degrees, and sub-specializations. To gauge their social media popularity, we utilized the K-index calculation which is determined by dividing the actual number of Twitter followers by the number of researcher's citations. The expected number of followers (F) is calculated using the formula F = 43.3 C ^ 0.32, where C represents the number of citations.

RESULTS

Physicians affiliated with the Mayo Clinic emerged as the most prominent presence on Twitter, constituting 16% of the total. They were followed closely by physicians from Mount Sinai Hospital (9%) and the University of Michigan Hospital (9%). Surprisingly, 76% of the physicians evaluated exhibited a low K-index, falling within the range of 0 to less than 2. This suggests that a significant number of highly influential physician-scientists are not receiving due recognition, as indicated by their relatively low number of followers. On the other hand, 24% of the physicians had an inflated K-index, exceeding 5, which positioned them as the "Kardashians". These individuals enjoyed greater social media popularity than their actual scientific contributions. Interestingly, our analysis revealed no discernible association between sex and K-index (P value of 0.92).

CONCLUSION

In the gastroenterology field, our study estimated that a majority (76%) of highly researched physicians are undervalued despite their significant scientific contributions.

The Relationship between Information Dissemination Channels, Health Belief, and COVID-19 Vaccination Intention: Evidence from China

In the context of the ongoing global epidemic of COVID-19 and frequent virus mutations, the implementation of vaccine is the key to the prevention and control of the epidemic at this stage. In order to provide recommendations and evidence to support global epidemic prevention and control and vaccination efforts from the perspectives of health communication and individual psychological perceptions and to improve the vaccination rate of COVID-19 vaccine among appropriate populations, this study conducted a questionnaire survey in eight districts of Beijing and collected a total of 525 valid data points. A health belief model was used to examine the predictors of COVID-19 vaccination behavior, and the relationship between different COVID-19 vaccine information dissemination channels, residents' health beliefs, and propensity to vaccinate was analyzed. This study found the following: (1) among new media, interpersonal communication and traditional media communication channels, the new media channel had the largest number of audiences; (2) the personal health beliefs of audiences in the three information channels differed significantly, with the highest perceived benefits and lowest perceived barriers in the interpersonal communication channel and the highest perceived barriers in the new media communication channel; (3) the health belief model was a significant predictor, with perceived benefits and barriers being the most effective attitudinal variables for predicting vaccination intention. This study is valuable for advancing and improving vaccine communication diffusion research and promoting wider application of the health belief model and communication media in health communication topics.

Social media and attitudes towards a COVID-19 vaccination: A systematic review of the literature

BACKGROUND

Vaccine hesitancy continues to limit global efforts in combatting the COVID-19 pandemic. Emerging research demonstrates the role of social media in disseminating information and potentially influencing people's attitudes towards public health campaigns. This systematic review sought to synthesize the current evidence regarding the potential role of social media in shaping COVID-19 vaccination attitudes, and to explore its potential for shaping public health interventions to address the issue of vaccine hesitancy.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review of the studies published from inception to 13 of March2022 by searching PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, PsychNET, Scopus, CINAHL, and MEDLINE. Studies that reported outcomes related to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine (attitudes, opinion, etc.) gathered from the social media platforms, and those analyzing the relationship between social media use and COVID-19 hesitancy/acceptance were included. Studies that reported no outcome of interest or analyzed data from sources other than social media (websites, newspapers, etc.) will be excluded. The Newcastle Ottawa Scale (NOS) was used to assess the quality of all cross-sectional studies included in this review. This study is registered with PROSPERO (CRD42021283219).

FINDINGS

Of the 2539 records identified, a total of 156 articles fully met the inclusion criteria. Overall, the quality of the cross-sectional studies was moderate - 2 studies received 10 stars, 5 studies received 9 stars, 9 studies were evaluated with 8, 12 studies with 7,16 studies with 6, 11 studies with 5, and 6 studies with 4 stars. The included studies were categorized into four categories. Cross-sectional studies reporting the association between reliance on social media and vaccine intentions mainly observed a negative relationship. Studies that performed thematic analyses of extracted social media data, mainly observed a domination of vaccine hesitant topics. Studies that explored the degree of polarization of specific social media contents related to COVID-19 vaccines observed a similar degree of content for both positive and negative tone posted on different social media platforms. Finally, studies that explored the fluctuations of vaccination attitudes/opinions gathered from social media identified specific events as significant cofactors that affect and shape vaccination intentions of individuals.

INTERPRETATION

This thorough examination of the various roles social media can play in disseminating information to the public, as well as how individuals behave on social media in the context of public health events, articulates the potential of social media as a platform of public health intervention to address vaccine hesitancy.

FUNDING

None.

The Digital Classroom: How to Leverage Social Media for Infectious Diseases Education

Social media (SoMe) platforms have been increasingly used by infectious diseases (ID) learners and educators in recent years. This trend has only accelerated with the changes brought to our educational spaces by the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. Given the increasingly diverse SoMe landscape, educators may find themselves struggling with how to effectively use these tools. In this Viewpoint we describe how to use SoMe platforms (e.g., Twitter, podcasts, and open-access online content portals) in medical education, highlight medical education theories supporting their use, and discuss how educators can engage with these learning tools effectively. We focus on how these platforms harness key principles of adult learning and provide a guide for educators in the effective use of SoMe tools in educating ID learners. Finally, we suggest how to effectively interact with and leverage these increasingly important digital platforms.

Does Seeing What Others Do Through Social Media Influence Vaccine Uptake and Help in the Herd Immunity Through Vaccination? A Cross-Sectional Analysis

Widespread acceptance of COVID-19 vaccination is the next major step in fighting the pandemic. However, significant variations are observed in the willingness to take the vaccination by citizens across different countries. Arguably, differences in vaccination intentions will be influenced by beliefs around vaccines to influence health. Often perceptions of what others are doing and the information available guide individuals' behaviors for vaccination. This is more so in the digital age with the influence of the internet and media. This study aims to determine the factors that impact willingness to vaccinate for COVID-19. We examined factors associated with acceptance of vaccine based on (1) constructs of the Health Belief Model (HBM), (2) sources of information, (3) social media usage, (4) knowledge of COVID-19 treatment, and (5) perception of government's efforts for mitigation. Randomly sampled online survey data was collected by a global firm between December 2020 and January 2021 from 372 citizens (with a response rate of 96.6%) from multiple regions, including North America, the Middle East, Europe, and Asia. Ordered probit regression suggests that the health belief model constructs hold. Perceived severity of COVID-19 (P < 0.001) and action cues of others taking the vaccine positively influences a subject's vaccine intent (P < 0.001), perceived benefits and perceived efficacy of the vaccine positively influences a subject's vaccine intent (P < 0.001). Perceived barriers negatively influence vaccine intent (P < 0.001). Interestingly as for media usage, mainstream media (e.g., TV, newspaper) (P = 0.006) and social media (P = 0.013) both negatively influence a subject's vaccine intent. Social media platforms that are more entertainment and social-based, such as Whatsapp, Instagram, and YouTube, have a negative and significant influence on vaccine intent (P = 0.061), compared to other more information-based social media platforms (e.g., Twitter, LinkedIn). Knowledge of COVID-19 treatment positively influences vaccine intent (P = 0.023). Lastly, governmental efforts' perceived reliability in mitigation strategy (P = 0.028) and response efforts (P = 0.004) negatively influence vaccine intent. The study highlights the "wait-and-see" action cue from others and leaders in the community. It also informs the importance of shaping media information for vaccination through informative media and social media outlets to counteract any misinformation.

Social media and vaccine hesitancy: new updates for the era of COVID-19 and globalized infectious diseases

Despite major advances in vaccination over the past century, resurgence of vaccine-preventable illnesses has led the World Health Organization to identify vaccine hesitancy as a major threat to global health. Vaccine hesitancy may be fueled by health information obtained from a variety of sources, including new media such as the Internet and social media platforms. As access to technology has improved, social media has attained global penetrance. In contrast to traditional media, social media allow individuals to rapidly create and share content globally without editorial oversight. Users may self-select content streams, contributing to ideological isolation. As such, there are considerable public health concerns raised by anti-vaccination messaging on such platforms and the consequent potential for downstream vaccine hesitancy, including the compromise of public confidence in future vaccine development for novel pathogens, such as SARS-CoV-2 for the prevention of COVID-19. In this review, we discuss the current position of social media platforms in propagating vaccine hesitancy and explore next steps in how social media may be used to improve health literacy and foster public trust in vaccination.

"Capturing your audience": analysis of Twitter engagements between tweets linked with an educational infographic or a peer-reviewed journal article

Information represented through conventional text may fall short of capturing the attention and promoting engagement with today's digital audience. Transforming text into visual tools, such as infographics, has emerged as a simplified method of delivering information to attract a broader audience and enhance information dissemination. The first step to evaluate the potential value of infographics is to quantify their appeal and engagement rates over conventional text. This retrospective pilot analysis sought to evaluate the difference between engagement rates for tweets containing an of infographic compared to tweets containing a link to a peer-reviewed journal article. A total of 752 tweets were published within the study period; of these, 40 tweets met inclusion criteria. When engagement rates were compared, there was an increase in median engagement rates for tweets containing an infographic compared to a tweet linked to a peer-reviewed article at 10.97% (IQR 3.47%) and 5.33% (IQR 3.17%), respectively. This pilot study provides insight on the potential impact for infographics to enhance engagement rate, which may subsequently correlate with an increase in audience reach and readership. Prospective studies are needed to validate the utility of infographics in promoting scholarship publicity, learner engagement, and as a transferable pedagogical tool to educate medical practitioners.

Pesquisar para quê?

Para contribuir com a atenção primária à saúde, a pesquisa em medicina de família e comunidade precisa evitar quatro fatores que têm levado ao desperdício da pesquisa biomédica em nível mundial: questões de pesquisa irrelevantes; métodos inadequados para alcançar os objetivos da pesquisa; lentidão e inadequação da publicação dos resultados; relato da pesquisa obscuro e pouco transparente. Neste editorial, introduzimos medidas para os autores garantirem o impacto de sua pesquisa, e apresentamos novas políticas editoriais da RBMFC.