Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29530838›Full record

Trial reportJournal of medical Internet research2018

Evaluating Patient Perspectives of Provider Professionalism on Twitter in an Academic Obstetrics and Gynecology Clinic: Patient Survey.

Rosalyn E Maben-Feaster, R Brent Stansfield, AnneMarie Opipari, Maya M Hammoud

Open access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Journal of medical Internet research, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
1.5field-weighted citation impact, top 17% of its field
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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Social media in cardiovascular medicine: a contemporary review.European heart journal. Digital health · 2020
    Review
  6. 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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Rosalyn E Maben-FeasterDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, United States.ORCID 0000-0003-2171-6385
R Brent StansfieldGraduate Medical Education, Wayne State University School of Medicine, Detroit, MI, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-3825-3631
AnneMarie OpipariUniversity of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, MI, United States.ORCID 0000-0003-3843-3373
Maya M HammoudDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, United States.ORCID 0000-0001-7829-7930
University of Michigan · USWayne State University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundOne-third of Americans use social media websites as a source of health care information. Twitter, a microblogging site that allows users to place 280-character posts-or tweets-on the Web, is emerging as an important social media platform for health care. However, most guidelines on medical professionalism on social media are based on expert opinion.

objectiveThis study sought to examine if provider Twitter profiles with educational tweets were viewed as more professional than profiles with personal tweets or a mixture of the two, and to determine the impact of provider gender on perceptions of professionalism in an academic obstetrics and gynecology clinic.

methodsThis study randomized obstetrics and gynecology patients at the University of Michigan Von Voigtlander Clinic to view one of six medical provider Twitter profiles, which differed in provider gender and the nature of tweets. Each participant answered 10 questions about their perception of the provider's professionalism based on the Twitter profile content.

resultsThe provider profiles with educational tweets alone received higher mean professionalism scores than profiles with personal tweets. Specifically, the female and male provider profiles with exclusively educational tweets had the highest and second highest overall mean professionalism ratings at 4.24 and 3.85, respectively. In addition, the female provider profiles received higher mean professionalism ratings than male provider profiles with the same content. The female profile with mixed content received a mean professionalism rating of 3.38 compared to 3.24 for the male mixed-content profile, and the female profile with only personal content received a mean professionalism rating of 3.68 compared to 2.68 for the exclusively personal male provider profile.

conclusionsThis study showed that in our obstetrics and gynecology clinic, patients perceived providers with educational profiles as more professional than those with a mixture of educational and personal tweets or only personal tweets. It also showed that our patient population perceived the female provider with educational tweets to be the most professional. This study will help inform the development of evidence-based guidelines for social media use in medicine as it adds to the growing body of literature examining professionalism and social media.

Indexed as

AdultAmbulatory CareFemaleGynecologyHumansMaleMiddle AgedNeeds AssessmentObstetricsPatientsPerceptionProfessionalismSocial MediaSurveys and Questionnairespatientsperceptionprofessionalismsocial networking sitessurveys and questionnairesTwitter

Identifiers

PMID29530838
PMCPMC5869178
OpenAlexW2792720804

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.