A communication strategy based on Twitter improves article citation rate and impact factor of medical journals

"What Do I Say? How Do I Say it?" Twitter as a Knowledge Dissemination Tool for Mental Health Research

This study aims to generate evidence-based guidelines for researchers regarding how to effectively disseminate mental health research via Twitter. Three hundred mental health research Tweets posted from September 2018 to September 2019 were sampled from two large Australian organizations. Twenty-seven predictor variables were coded for each Tweet across five thematic categories: messaging; research area; mental health area; external networks; and media features. Regression analyses were conducted to determine associations with engagement outcomes of Favourites, Retweets, and Comments. Less than half (n = 10) of predictor variables passed validity tests. Notably, conclusions could not reliably be drawn on whether a Tweet featured evidence-based information. Tweets were significantly more likely to be Retweeted if they contained a hyperlink or multimedia. Tweets were significantly more likely to receive comments if they focused on a specific population group. These associations remain significant when controlling for organization. These findings indicate that researchers may be able to maximize engagement on Twitter by highlighting the population groups that the research applies to and enriching Tweets with multimedia content. In addition, care should be taken to ensure users can infer which messages are evidence-based. Guidelines and an accompanying resource are proposed.

Evaluation of Medical Confidentiality Breaches on Twitter Among Anesthesiology and Intensive Care Health Care Workers

BACKGROUND

With the generalization of social network use by health care workers, we observe the emergence of breaches in medical confidentiality. Our objective was to determine, among anesthesiology and intensive care health care workers, the rate of medical confidentiality breaches among professional tweets.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective analysis of public Twitter data available through the official Twitter application program interface. The profiles of anesthesiology and intensive care professionals were identified thanks to keywords in their biography. All the tweets with a photograph and all the text-only tweets containing at least one specific keyword related to anesthesiology or intensive care were extracted. We selected only the tweets with a health care-related character. Then, we analyzed 10% of the tweets with a photograph and 10% of the text-only tweets extracted and noted those presenting a breach of medical confidentiality.

RESULTS

After a first screening of 12,705 accounts, we manually analyzed 431 tweets with photograph(s) and 9000 text-only tweets from 1831 accounts. We found 44 (10.2%) breaches of medical confidentiality among the photographs and 76 (0.8%) among text-only tweets. These 120 problematic tweets came from 96 profiles (96/1831; 5.2%); 3.7% of North American profiles breached medical confidentiality versus 6.3% of profiles from other areas; P = .03. When comparing the distribution of the number of followers and tweets, accounts with breach of medical confidentiality tweets had more tweets and followers than profiles without (both P < .0001).

CONCLUSIONS

We found a significant proportion of tweets with breach of medical confidentiality among anesthesiology and intensive care professionals accounts.

Worldwide Presence of National Anesthesia Societies on Four Major Social Networks in 2021: Observational Case Study

Background

Although the presence of medical societies on social networks (SNs) could be interesting for disseminating professional information, there is no study investigating their presence on SNs.

Objective

The aim of this viewpoint is to describe the worldwide presence and activity of national anesthesia societies on SNs.

Methods

This observational study assessed the active presence (≥1 post in the year preceding the collection date) of the World Federation of Societies of Anesthesiologists member societies on the SNs Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, and YouTube. We collected data concerning each anesthesia society on the World Federation of Societies of Anesthesiologists website.

Results

Among the 136 societies, 66 (48.5%) had an active presence on at least one SN. The most used SN was Facebook (n=60, 44.1%), followed by Twitter (n=37, 27.2%), YouTube (n=26, 19.1%), and Instagram (n=16, 11.8%). The SN with the largest number of followers was Facebook for 52 (78.8%) societies and Twitter for 12 (18.2%) societies. The number of followers was 361 (IQR 75-1806) on Twitter, 2494 (IQR 1049-5369) on Facebook, 1400 (IQR 303-3058) on Instagram, and 214 (IQR 33-955) on YouTube. There was a strong correlation between the number of posts and the number of followers on Twitter (r=0.95, 95% CI 0.91-0.97; P<.001), Instagram (r=0.83, 95% CI 0.58-0.94; P<.001), and YouTube (r=0.69, 95% CI 0.42-0.85; P<.001). According to the density of anesthetists in the country, there was no difference between societies with and without active SN accounts.

Conclusions

Less than half of national anesthesia societies have at least one active account on SNs. Twitter and Facebook are the most used SNs.

The Association Between Professional Accounts on Social Networks Twitter and ResearchGate and the Number of Scientific Publications and Citations Among Anesthesia Researchers: Observational Study

BACKGROUND

Social networks are now essential tools for promoting research and researchers. However, there is no study investigating the link between presence or not on professional social networks and scientific publication or citation for a given researcher.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to study the link between professional presence on social networks and scientific publications/citations among anesthesia researchers.

METHODS

We included all the French full professors and associate professors of anesthesia. We analyzed their presence on the social networks Twitter (professional account with ≥1 tweet over the 6 previous months) and ResearchGate. We extracted their bibliometric parameters for the 2016-2020 period via the Web of Science Core Collection (Clarivate Analytics) database in the Science Citation Index-Expanded index.

RESULTS

A total of 162 researchers were analyzed; 42 (25.9%) had an active Twitter account and 110 (67.9%) a ResearchGate account. There was no difference between associate professors and full professors regarding active presence on Twitter (8/23 [35%] vs. 34/139 [24.5%], respectively; P=.31) or ResearchGate (15/23 [65%] vs. 95/139 [68.3%], respectively; P=.81). Researchers with an active Twitter account (median [IQR]) had more scientific publications (45 [28-61] vs. 26 [12-41]; P<.001), a higher h-index (12 [8-16] vs. 8 [5-11]; P<.001), a higher number of citations per publication (12.54 [9.65-21.8] vs. 10.63 [5.67-16.10]; P=.01), and a higher number of citations (563 [321-896] vs. 263 [105-484]; P<.001). Researchers with a ResearchGate account (median [IQR]) had more scientific publications (33 [17-47] vs. 26 [9-43]; P=.03) and a higher h-index (9 [6-13] vs. 8 [3-11]; P=.03). There was no difference between researchers with a ResearchGate account and those without it concerning the number of citations per publication and overall number of citations. In multivariate analysis including sex, academic status, and presence on social networks, the presence on Twitter was associated with the number of publications (β=20.2; P<.001), the number of citations (β=494.5; P<.001), and the h-index (β=4.5; P<.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Among French anesthesia researchers, an active presence on Twitter is associated with higher scientific publication and citations.