Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29610112›Full record

ArticleJMIR public health and surveillance2018

Contents, Followers, and Retweets of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Office of Advanced Molecular Detection (@CDC_AMD) Twitter Profile: Cross-Sectional Study.

Isaac Chun-Hai Fung, Ashley M Jackson, Lindsay A Mullican, Elizabeth B Blankenship, Mary Elizabeth Goff, Amy J Guinn, Nitin Saroha, Zion Tsz Ho Tse

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR public health and surveillance, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. 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

8 authors.

Isaac Chun-Hai Fung *Department of Epidemiology and Environmental Health Sciences, Jiann-Ping Hsu College of Public Health, Georgia Southern University, Statesboro, GA, United States.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5496-2529
Ashley M Jackson *Department of Epidemiology and Environmental Health Sciences, Jiann-Ping Hsu College of Public Health, Georgia Southern University, Statesboro, GA, United States.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1480-2843
Lindsay A Mullican *Department of Epidemiology and Environmental Health Sciences, Jiann-Ping Hsu College of Public Health, Georgia Southern University, Statesboro, GA, United States.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9531-5571
Elizabeth B BlankenshipDepartment of Epidemiology and Environmental Health Sciences, Jiann-Ping Hsu College of Public Health, Georgia Southern University, Statesboro, GA, United States.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3650-5441
Mary Elizabeth GoffDepartment of Epidemiology and Environmental Health Sciences, Jiann-Ping Hsu College of Public Health, Georgia Southern University, Statesboro, GA, United States.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7982-0444
Amy J GuinnOffice of Advanced Molecular Detection, National Center for Emerging and Zoonotic Infectious Diseases, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA, United States.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3809-8923
Nitin SarohaDepartment of Computer Science, The University of Georgia, Athens, GA, United States.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8938-7680
Zion Tsz Ho TseSchool of Electrical and Computer Engineering, College of Engineering, The University of Georgia, Athens, GA, United States.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9741-1137

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe Office of Advanced Molecular Detection (OAMD), Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), manages a Twitter profile (@CDC_AMD). To our knowledge, no prior study has analyzed a CDC Twitter handle's entire contents and all followers.

objectiveThis study aimed to describe the contents and followers of the Twitter profile @CDC_AMD and to assess if attaching photos or videos to tweets posted by @CDC_AMD would increase retweet frequency.

methodsData of @CDC_AMD were retrieved on November 21, 2016. All followers (N=809) were manually categorized. All tweets (N=768) were manually coded for contents and whether photos or videos were attached. Retweet count for each tweet was recorded. Negative binomial regression models were applied to both the original and the retweet corpora.

resultsAmong the 809 followers, 26.0% (210/809) were individual health professionals, 11.6% (94/809) nongovernmental organizations, 3.3% (27/809) government agencies' accounts, 3.3% (27/809) accounts of media organizations and journalists, and 0.9% (7/809) academic journals, with 54.9% (444/809) categorized as miscellaneous. A total of 46.9% (360/768) of @CDC_AMD's tweets referred to the Office's website and their current research; 17.6% (135/768) referred to their scientists' publications. Moreover, 80% (69/86) of tweets retweeted by @CDC_AMD fell into the miscellaneous category. In addition, 43.4% (333/768) of the tweets contained photos or videos, whereas the remaining 56.6% (435/768) did not. Attaching photos or videos to original @CDC_AMD tweets increases the number of retweets by 37% (probability ratio=1.37, 95% CI 1.13-1.67, P=.002). Content topics did not explain or modify this association.

conclusionsThis study confirms CDC health communicators' experience that original tweets created by @CDC_AMD Twitter profile sharing images or videos (or their links) received more retweets. The current policy of attaching images to tweets should be encouraged.

Indexed as

communications mediahealth communicationsocial media

Identifiers

PMID29610112
PMCPMC5902693

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.