ArticleJournal of education and health promotion2018
#FOAMems: Engaging paramedics with free, online open-access education.
Article in Journal of education and health promotion, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Free Open Access Medical Education (FOAM) in emergency medicine: use and perceived clinical relevance from a large cross-sectional survey.International journal of emergency medicine · 2026Article
- Evaluation of Emergency First Response's Competency in Undergraduate College Students: Enhancing Sustainable Medical Education in the Community for Work Occupational Safety.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Article
- Error analysis of nonnative authors' publications in health-care journals: A descriptive study.Journal of education and health promotion · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
aimTwitter MATERIALS AND
methodsAn analytical report for #FOAMems was generated on symplur.com from February 4, 2014, to April 30, 2017. A transcript of all #FOAMems tweets for a randomly selected 1 month period (October 2015) was generated, and quantitative content analysis was performed by two reviewers. Tweets were categorized according to source (original tweet/retweet) and whether referenced. The top 92 tweeters were analyzed for professional identity.
resultsDuring the study period, there were over 99,000 tweets containing #FOAMems, by over 9,200 participants. These resulted in almost 144 million impressions. Of the top 92 tweeters, 50 were paramedics (54%). Tweets were mainly related to cardiac (23%), leadership (19%), and trauma (14%). The 1-month period resulted in 649 original tweets, with 2110 retweets; 1070 of these were referenced.
conclusionParamedics are engaging with both clinical and nonclinical content on Twitter
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.