Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25908092›Full record

SynthesisJournal of medical Internet research2015

Globalization of continuing professional development by journal clubs via microblogging: a systematic review.

Matthew John Roberts, Marlon Perera, Nathan Lawrentschuk, Diana Romanic, Nathan Papa, Damien Bolton

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of medical Internet research, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 37 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
37citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

37 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Digital health-high tech or high touch?Wiener medizinische Wochenschrift (1946) · 2023
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Advancing trauma care through social media.Trauma surgery & acute care open · 2021
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Matthew John RobertsSchool of Medicine, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia. m.roberts2@uq.edu.au.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0552-7402

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundJournal clubs are an essential tool in promoting clinical evidence-based medical education to all medical and allied health professionals. Twitter represents a public, microblogging forum that can facilitate traditional journal club requirements, while also reaching a global audience, and participation for discussion with study authors and colleagues.

objectiveThe aim of the current study was to evaluate the current state of social media-facilitated journal clubs, specifically Twitter, as an example of continuing professional development.

methodsA systematic review of literature databases (Medline, Embase, CINAHL, Web of Science, ERIC via ProQuest) was performed according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. A systematic search of Twitter, the followers of identified journal clubs, and Symplur was also performed. Demographic and monthly tweet data were extracted from Twitter and Symplur. All manuscripts related to Twitter-based journal clubs were included. Statistical analyses were performed in MS Excel and STATA.

resultsFrom a total of 469 citations, 11 manuscripts were included and referred to five Twitter-based journal clubs (#ALiEMJC, #BlueJC, #ebnjc, #urojc, #meded). A Twitter-based journal club search yielded 34 potential hashtags/accounts, of which 24 were included in the final analysis. The median duration of activity was 11.75 (interquartile range [IQR] 19.9, SD 10.9) months, with 7 now inactive. The median number of followers and participants was 374 (IQR 574) and 157 (IQR 272), respectively. An overall increasing establishment of active Twitter-based journal clubs was observed, resulting in an exponential increase in total cumulative tweets (R(2)=.98), and tweets per month (R(2)=.72). Cumulative tweets for specific journal clubs increased linearly, with @ADC_JC, @EBNursingBMJ, @igsjc, @iurojc, and @NephJC, and showing greatest rate of change, as well as total impressions per month since establishment. An average of two tweets per month was estimated for the majority of participants, while the "Top 10" tweeters for @iurojc showed a significantly lower contribution to overall tweets for each month (P<.005). A linearly increasing impression:tweet ratio was observed for the top five journal clubs.

conclusionsTwitter-based journal clubs are free, time-efficient, and publicly accessible means to facilitate international discussions regarding clinically important evidence-based research.

Indexed as

Periodicals as TopicAdultBloggingEducation, ContinuingHumansInternationalitySocial Mediacontinuing medical educationcontinuing professional developmentjournal clubsocial mediasystematic review

Identifiers

PMID25908092
PMCPMC4424319

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.