Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30948581›Full record

Trial reportBMJ open2019

Day of the week to tweet: a randomised controlled trial.

Mahesh Jayaram, Clive E Adams, Johannes S Friedel, Eimear McClenaghan, Alan A Montgomery, Maritta Välimäki, Lena Schmidt, Jun Xia, Sai Zhao

Abstract readRandomized Controlled TrialEquivalence Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMJ open, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Trial
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

9 authors.

Mahesh JayaramDepartment of Psychiatry, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-5352-1075
Clive E AdamsSchool of Medicine, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.
Johannes S FriedelHochschule Furtwangen University of Applied Sciences, Furtwangen, Baden-Württemberg, Germany.
Eimear McClenaghanMedical School, University of Aberdeen Institute of Applied Health Sciences, Aberdeen, UK.
Alan A MontgomeryNottingham Clinical Trials Unit, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.
Maritta VälimäkiDepartment of Nursing Science, University of Turku, Turku, Finland.
Lena SchmidtHochschule Furtwangen University of Applied Sciences, Furtwangen, Baden-Württemberg, Germany.
Jun XiaSystematic Review Solutions Limited, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.
Sai ZhaoSystematic Review Solutions Limited, Ningbo, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo assess the effects of using health social media on different days of the working week on web activity.

designIndividually randomised controlled parallel group superiority trial.

settingTwitter and Weibo.

participants194 Cochrane Schizophrenia Group full reviews with an abstract and plain language summary web page. There were no human participants.

interventionsThree randomly ordered slightly different messages (maximum of 140 characters), each containing a short URL to the freely accessible summary page, were sent on specific times on a single day. Each of these messages sent on Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday and Friday was compared with the one sent on Monday. OUTCOME: The primary outcome was visits to the relevant Cochrane summary web page at 1 week. Secondary outcomes were other metrics of web activity at 1 week.

resultsThere was no evidence that disseminating microblogs on different days of the working week resulted in any differences in target website activity as measured by Google Analytics (n=194, all page views, adjusted ratios of geometric means 0.86 (95% CI 0.63 to 1.18), 0.88 (95% CI 0.64 to 1.21), 0.88 (95% CI 0.65 to 1.21), 0.91 (95% CI 0.66 to 1.24) for Tuesday-Friday, respectively, overall p=0.89). There were consistent findings for all outcomes. However, activity on the review site substantially increased compared with weeks preceding the intervention.

conclusionThere are no clear differences in the effect when 1 weekday is compared with another, but our study suggests that using microblogging social media such as Twitter and Weibo do increase information-seeking behaviour on health. Tweet any day but do Tweet.

Indexed as

Biomedical ResearchInformation DisseminationSocial MediaHumansProspective Studiesrandomised controlled trialsschizophreniasocial mediatwitterweibo

Identifiers

PMID30948581
PMCPMC6500215

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.