M Rouprêt1, V Misraï2. 1. Service d'urologie, hôpital de la Pitié-Salpêtrière, AP-HP, 83, boulevard Hôpital, 75013 Paris, France; UPMC université Paris 06, GRC5, ONCOTYPE-URO, institut universitaire de cancérologie, 75005 Paris, France. Electronic address: mroupret@gmail.com. 2. Service d'urologie, clinique Pasteur, 31300 Toulouse, France.
Abstract
AIM: Social media (#SoMe) has changed the face of modern medicine. Our purpose was to asses the potential interest of Twitter in the field of urology. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A systematic review of the literature has been performed using PubMed without timeline restriction with the following keywords (MeSH): social media; Web 2.0; Twitter; Internet; network; urology; journal club; education. RESULTS: There were 3 categories of interest of Twitter in the field of urology: spread of scientific knowledge, scientific interaction during medical conferences and medical education and international medical debates. The unique spread of evidence-based-medecine through traditional scientific journals in paper version is over. Main scientific journals in urology and scientific societies are now using a Twitter account and became virtual. They use new bibliometrics available on #SoMe to estimate the social impact. Twitter allows for a better interactivity of doctors attending scientific conferences. Exponential use of Twitter is in the interest of speakers and leaders, audience and scientific societies. Lastly, medical academic education and continuing medical education can be achieved through #SoMe. Twitter became a lively virtual platform for scientific debates for complex oncological cases (dematerialized tumor board). Twitter is also a place for intense scientific discussion during virtual journal club without geographic or timeline restriction. CONCLUSION: Physicians need to respect the rules for a wise use of #SoMe in order not to break the Hippocratic Oath. There is a revolution around #SoMe and Twitter in the spread of scientific knowledge and academic teaching. International urologists are already committed in this evolution and France should also get involved.
AIM: Social media (#SoMe) has changed the face of modern medicine. Our purpose was to asses the potential interest of Twitter in the field of urology. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A systematic review of the literature has been performed using PubMed without timeline restriction with the following keywords (MeSH): social media; Web 2.0; Twitter; Internet; network; urology; journal club; education. RESULTS: There were 3 categories of interest of Twitter in the field of urology: spread of scientific knowledge, scientific interaction during medical conferences and medical education and international medical debates. The unique spread of evidence-based-medecine through traditional scientific journals in paper version is over. Main scientific journals in urology and scientific societies are now using a Twitter account and became virtual. They use new bibliometrics available on #SoMe to estimate the social impact. Twitter allows for a better interactivity of doctors attending scientific conferences. Exponential use of Twitter is in the interest of speakers and leaders, audience and scientific societies. Lastly, medical academic education and continuing medical education can be achieved through #SoMe. Twitter became a lively virtual platform for scientific debates for complex oncological cases (dematerialized tumor board). Twitter is also a place for intense scientific discussion during virtual journal club without geographic or timeline restriction. CONCLUSION: Physicians need to respect the rules for a wise use of #SoMe in order not to break the Hippocratic Oath. There is a revolution around #SoMe and Twitter in the spread of scientific knowledge and academic teaching. International urologists are already committed in this evolution and France should also get involved.
Authors: M E Westerman; B Bhindi; R Choo; M T Gettman; R J Karnes; L Klotz; S A Boorjian Journal: Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis Date: 2017-05-02 Impact factor: 5.554
Authors: Hendrik Borgmann; Jan-Henning Woelm; Axel Merseburger; Tim Nestler; Johannes Salem; Maximilian P Brandt; Axel Haferkamp; Stacy Loeb Journal: Can Urol Assoc J Date: 2016 Jan-Feb Impact factor: 1.862