Literature DB >> 33030380

Social Media Influence Does Not Reflect Scholarly or Clinical Activity in Real Life.

Brian Zenger1, J Michael Swink1, Jeffrey L Turner1, T Jared Bunch1, John J Ryan1, Rashmee U Shah1, Mintu P Turakhia2, Jonathan P Piccini3, Benjamin A Steinberg1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Social media has become a major source of communication in medicine. We aimed to understand the relationship between physicians' social media influence and their scholarly and clinical activity.
METHODS: We identified attending US electrophysiologists on Twitter. We compared physician Twitter activity to (1) scholarly publication record (h-index) and (2) clinical volume according to Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. The ratio of observed versus expected (obs/exp) Twitter followers was calculated based on each scholarly (K-index) and clinical activity.
RESULTS: We identified 284 physicians, with mean Twitter age of 5.0 (SD, 3.1) years and median 568 followers (25th, 75th: 195, 1146). They had a median 34.5 peer-reviewed articles (25th, 75th: 14, 105), 401 citations (25th, 75th: 102, 1677), and h-index 9 (25th, 75th: 4, 19.8). The median K-index was 0.4 (25th, 75th: 0.15, 1.0), ranging from 0.0008 to 29.2. The median number of electrophysiology procedures was 77 (25th, 75th: 0, 160) and evaluation and management visits 264 (25th, 75th: 59, 516) in 2017. The top 1% electrophysiologists for followers accounted for 20% of all followers, 17% of status updates, had a mean h-index of 6 (versus 15 for others, P=0.3), and accounted for 1% of procedural and evaluation and management volumes. They had a mean K-index of 21 (versus 0.77 for others, P<0.0001) and clinical obs/exp follower ratio of 17.9 and 18.1 for procedures and evaluation and management (P<0.001 each, versus others [0.81 for each]).
CONCLUSIONS: Electrophysiologists are active on Twitter, with modest influence often representative of scholarly and clinical activity. However, the most influential physicians appear to have relatively modest scholarly and clinical activity.

Keywords:  Medicare; electrophysiology; publication; social media

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 33030380      PMCID: PMC7674208          DOI: 10.1161/CIRCEP.120.008847

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol        ISSN: 1941-3084


  10 in total

1.  A Heart Rhythm Society Electrophysiology Workforce study: current survey analysis of physician workforce trends.

Authors:  Thomas F Deering; Walter K Clair; M Craig Delaughter; Westby G Fisher; Ann C Garlitski; Bruce L Wilkoff; Anne M Gillis
Journal:  Heart Rhythm       Date:  2010-07-23       Impact factor: 6.343

2.  A randomized trial of social media from Circulation.

Authors:  Caroline S Fox; Marc A Bonaca; John J Ryan; Joseph M Massaro; Karen Barry; Joseph Loscalzo
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  2014-11-18       Impact factor: 29.690

3.  His-bundle pacing: impact of social media.

Authors:  Dominik Beer; Gopi Dandamudi; John M Mandrola; Paul A Friedman; Pugazhendhi Vijayaraman
Journal:  Europace       Date:  2019-10-01       Impact factor: 5.214

Review 4.  Twitter as a tool for ophthalmologists.

Authors:  Robert Micieli; Jonathan A Micieli
Journal:  Can J Ophthalmol       Date:  2012-06-29       Impact factor: 1.882

5.  Online collaboration: Scientists and the social network.

Authors:  Richard Van Noorden
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2014-08-14       Impact factor: 49.962

6.  The Use of Twitter by Radiology Journals: An Analysis of Twitter Activity and Impact Factor.

Authors:  Brendan S Kelly; Ciaran E Redmond; Gregory J Nason; Gerard M Healy; Niall A Horgan; Eric J Heffernan
Journal:  J Am Coll Radiol       Date:  2016-08-28       Impact factor: 5.532

7.  How Twitter is changing medical research.

Authors:  Nicole Wetsman
Journal:  Nat Med       Date:  2020-01       Impact factor: 53.440

8.  The Kardashian index: a measure of discrepant social media profile for scientists.

Authors:  Neil Hall
Journal:  Genome Biol       Date:  2014-07-30       Impact factor: 13.583

9.  Twitter Predicts Citation Rates of Ecological Research.

Authors:  Brandon K Peoples; Stephen R Midway; Dana Sackett; Abigail Lynch; Patrick B Cooney
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2016-11-11       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Randomized Controlled Trial of Social Media: Effect of Increased Intensity of the Intervention.

Authors:  Caroline S Fox; Ellen B Gurary; John Ryan; Marc Bonaca; Karen Barry; Joseph Loscalzo; Joseph Massaro
Journal:  J Am Heart Assoc       Date:  2016-04-27       Impact factor: 5.501

  10 in total
  1 in total

Review 1.  Virtual Transformation and the Use of Social Media: Cardiac Electrophysiology Education in the Post-COVID-19 Era.

Authors:  Janet K Han; Tina Baykaner; Christopher V DeSimone; Susan P Etheridge; Piotr Futyma; Sandeep A Saha; Martin K Stiles; Rakesh Gopinathannair; Rajesh Kabra; Faisal M Merchant
Journal:  Curr Treat Options Cardiovasc Med       Date:  2021-10-19
  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.