Association Between Twitter Reception at a National Urology Conference and Future Publication Status
Association Between Twitter Reception at a National Urology Conference and Future Publication Status
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/j.euf.2019.05.004
复制
发表时间：
2021-03-04
影响因子：
5.4
通讯作者：
Leapman, Michael S.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Nolte, Adam C.;Nguyen, Kevin A.;Leapman, Michael S.
背景：社交媒体是传播医学研究的一种越来越受欢迎的手段。然而，目前尚不清楚内容被分享的程度是否反映了科学价值或影响的传统衡量标准。（通过“喜欢”和“转推”[RT]的数量来衡量）与在国家泌尿学会议上提出的原始研究相关，与随后的出版状态和期刊影响因子（IF）相关。设计、设置和参与者：我们回顾性分析了2015年5月1日至6月1日通过Keyhole存档平台使用标签“#aua15”获得的Twitter数据，反映了美国泌尿外科协会（AUA）会议的标签。结果测量和统计分析：我们分析了所有包含与研究相关的关键词的帖子。在报告具有可辨别属性的新研究的帖子中，我们评估了45个月内的后续出版状态，包括期刊IF。我们比较了社交媒体接收（喜欢/RT的数量）的出版状态，并评估社交媒体接收和随后的期刊IF之间的关系使用Pearson's correlation.Results and limitations：2015年5月1日至6月1日期间，共有15303个帖子与#aua15相关，达到2263438个用户。喜欢/RT的中位数为2（四分位数间距1-3）。我们分析了所有收到至少一个像/RT（n = 2964）与研究相关的文本内容的帖子，并确定了496个与会议上提出的新科学研究相关的帖子。AUA会议后45个月，PubMed上可识别96项研究（19.4%）。在AUA会议上有更多喜欢/RT的研究更有可能随后发表（p = 0.001）。在已发表的研究中，点赞/RT数量与发表期刊IF之间存在适度的正相关（r（2）= 0.36）。结论：社交媒体参与全国医学会议上提交的数据的测量与随后的发表和发表后的期刊IF呈正相关。患者总结：在全国性会议上更经常分享的新泌尿学研究更有可能发表在被引用率更高的期刊上。(C)2019年欧洲泌尿外科协会。Elsevier B. V.出版，保留所有权利。
Background: Social media is an increasingly popular means to disseminate medical research. However, it is unknown whether the extent to which content is shared mirrors conventional measures of scientific merit or impact.Objective: To examine whether Twitter activity (as measured by the number of "likes" and "retweets" [RTs]) relating to original research presented at a national urology meeting was associated with subsequent publication status and journal impact factor (IF).Design, setting, and participants: We retrospectively reviewed Twitter data obtained through the Keyhole archiving platform using the hashtag "#aua15" from May 1 through June 1, 2015 reflecting the hashtag of the American Urological Association (AUA) meeting.Outcome measurements and statistical analysis: We analyzed all posts containing keywords related to research studies. Among posts reporting on newly presented studies with discernable attribution, we evaluated subsequent publication status within 45 mo, including journal IF. We compared social media reception (number of likes/RTs) by publication status, and assessed the relationship between social media reception and subsequent journal IF using Pearson's correlation.Results and limitations: A total of 15 303 posts were associated with #aua15 between May 1 and June 1, 2015, which reached 2 263 438 users. The median number of likes/RTs was 2 (interquartile range 1-3). We analyzed all posts receiving at least one like/RT (n = 2964) for text content related to research and identified 496 associated with new scientific studies presented at the meeting. Forty-five months following the AUA meeting, 96 studies were identifiable on PubMed (19.4%). Research with more likes/RTs at the AUA meeting were more likely to be subsequently published (p = 0.001). Among published studies, there was a modest, positive correlation between the number of likes/RTs and publication journal IF (r(2) = 0.36).Conclusions: Measures of social media engagement with data presented at a national medical meeting were positively correlated with subsequent publication and journal IF after presentation.Patient summary: New urological research that was shared more often at a national meeting was more likely to be published in journals that are more highly cited. (C) 2019 European Association of Urology. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.