Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28747291›Full record

ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2017

Dental Blogs, Podcasts, and Associated Social Media: Descriptive Mapping and Analysis.

Julia Melkers, Diana Hicks, Simone Rosenblum, Kimberley R Isett, Jacqueline Elliott

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed
–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

21 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Characterizing the Content Related to Oral Health Education on TikTok.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Julia MelkersSchool of Public Policy, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA, United States.ORCID 0000-0001-5045-4068
Diana HicksSchool of Public Policy, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-0264-4307
Simone RosenblumSchool of Public Policy, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-5634-9813
Kimberley R IsettSchool of Public Policy, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-7584-0181
Jacqueline ElliottCollege of Computing, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-3828-0242

Funding

The National Dental PBRNU19DE022516 · NIDCR · UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA AT BIRMINGHAM · PI GILBERT, GREGG H · 2012 to 2018
$66.4M
NIDCR NIH HHS U19 DE022516
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundStudies of social media in both medicine and dentistry have largely focused on the value of social media for marketing to and communicating with patients and for clinical education. There is limited evidence of how dental clinicians contribute to and use social media to disseminate and access information relevant to clinical care.

objectiveThe purpose of this study was to inventory and assess the entry, growth, sources, and content of clinically relevant social media in dentistry.

methodsWe developed an inventory of blogs, podcasts, videos, and associated social media disseminating clinical information to dentists. We assessed hosts' media activity in terms of their combinations of modalities, entry and exit dates, frequency of posting, types of content posted, and size of audience.

resultsOur study showed that clinically relevant information is posted by dentists and hygienists on social media. Clinically relevant information was provided in 89 blogs and podcasts, and topic analysis showed motives for blogging by host type: 55% (49 hosts) were practicing dentists or hygienists, followed by consultants (27 hosts, 30%), media including publishers and discussion board hosts (8 hosts, 9%), and professional organizations and corporations.

conclusionsWe demonstrated the participation of and potential for practicing dentists and hygienists to use social media to share clinical and other information with practicing colleagues. There is a clear audience for these social media sites, suggesting a changing mode of information diffusion in dentistry. This study was a first effort to fill the gap in understanding the nature and potential role of social media in clinical dentistry.

Indexed as

Social MediaAccess to InformationBloggingDentistryHumansblogsclinical informationdentistrypodcastssocial media

Identifiers

PMID28747291
PMCPMC5553003

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.