Literature DB >> 27687748

Use of Twitter Polls to Determine Public Opinion Regarding Content Presented at a Major National Specialty Society Meeting.

Andrew B Rosenkrantz1, C Matthew Hawkins2.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the feasibility of using Twitter polls to assess public opinion regarding session content at a national specialty society meeting.
METHODS: Twitter polls allow users to embed multiple-choice questions within tweets and automatically aggregate responses. Two radiologists attending the 2016 annual meeting of the ACR posted a Twitter poll containing the hashtag #ACR2016 during 10 meeting sessions addressing socioeconomics/advocacy, patient experience, and social media/informatics (20 polls total). Each poll contained a question asking for an opinion regarding the session's content. Polls were open for responses for 24 hours.
RESULTS: The average number of responses per poll was significantly higher for the user with the larger number of Twitter followers (24.3 ± 14.4 versus 11.2 ± 9.8, P = .015). A total of 57% of respondents agreed that radiologists' payments should shift to value-based payments, and 86% agreed that radiologists should routinely survey their patients to monitor quality; however, 83% disagreed with basing physician payments on patient satisfaction scores. A total of 85% disagreed that the artificial intelligence supercomputer Watson will entirely replace radiologists. A total of 76% agreed that social media can drive business at less cost than standard marketing. A total of 56% agreed with the direction of the ACR's advocacy and regulatory efforts, whereas 74% considered the ACR's advocacy efforts to be moderately or very useful for their practice. A total of 50% planned to change their practice on the basis of keynote remarks by Dr Ezekiel Emanuel.
CONCLUSIONS: Twitter polls provide a free and easy infrastructure to potentially capture global public sentiment during the course of a medical society meeting. Their use may enrich and promote discussions of key session content.
Copyright © 2016 American College of Radiology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Social media; Twitter; medical conferences; public opinion; surveys

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27687748     DOI: 10.1016/j.jacr.2016.07.024

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Am Coll Radiol        ISSN: 1546-1440            Impact factor:   5.532


  6 in total

Review 1.  Stakeholders' perspectives on the future of artificial intelligence in radiology: a scoping review.

Authors:  Ling Yang; Ioana Cezara Ene; Reza Arabi Belaghi; David Koff; Nina Stein; Pasqualina Lina Santaguida
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2021-09-21       Impact factor: 5.315

Review 2.  The use and impact of Twitter at medical conferences: Best practices and Twitter etiquette.

Authors:  Naveen Pemmaraju; Ruben A Mesa; Navneet S Majhail; Michael A Thompson
Journal:  Semin Hematol       Date:  2017-08-24       Impact factor: 3.851

3.  Role of social and non-social online media: how to properly leverage your internet presence for professional development and research.

Authors:  Vinay Prabhu; Jessica T Lovett; Kamran Munawar
Journal:  Abdom Radiol (NY)       Date:  2021-06-05

4.  Twitter Use by Academic Nuclear Medicine Programs: Pilot Content Analysis Study.

Authors:  Ananya Panda; Akash Sharma; Ayca Dundar; Ann Packard; Lee Aase; Amy Kotsenas; Ayse Tuba Kendi
Journal:  JMIR Form Res       Date:  2021-11-08

5.  Twitter Poll as a Medium for Questionnaire-Based Health Survey: An Experience of a Pilot Study on the Preference of Systems of Medicine for Various Health Conditions.

Authors:  Shaikat Mondal; Purab K Modak; Mohammad Selim; Himel Mondal; Chayan Baidya; Mojca Hribersek; Rajeev K Singla; Bairong Shen; Atanas G Atanasov
Journal:  Cureus       Date:  2022-09-04

6.  Comprehensive analysis of Twitter usage during a major medical conference held virtually versus in-person.

Authors:  Thomas Dratsch; Daniel Pinto Dos Santos; Nedim Christoph Beste; Xue Davis; Roman Kloeckner; Erkan Celik; Michael Korenkov; David Maintz
Journal:  Insights Imaging       Date:  2022-01-20
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.