ArticleStem cells translational medicine2019
Science and Social Media.
Article in Stem cells translational medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Content quality and reliability of mental health videos for cancer patients on social media platforms: a cross-sectional study.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026Article
- Bilibili and TikTok as sources of information on atrophic gastritis and the quality of their content.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Challenging Reward Structures and Organizational Cultures that Propagate Stem Cell Hyperbole.Stem cell reviews and reports · 2025Review
- Bilibili, TikTok, and YouTube as sources of information on gastric cancer: assessment and analysis of the content and quality.BMC public health · 2024Article
- Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on the Dental Preferences of Patients in the Private Sector.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- User Experience and Sustainability of 3D Printing in Dentistry.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Social media usage to share information in communication journals: An analysis of social media activity and article citations.PloS one · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
He Jiankui et al. conducted an experiment that resulted in the birth of the first human babies with germline gene editing. Initial and predominant communications of their work occurred via social media and outside of the norms for reviewing, approving, and engaging around work in science. This case provides an opportunity to reflect on the evolving and increasing presence of social media in science, its strengths, weaknesses, and the potential to develop applications that improve how we review, approve, and engage around the work of science. Social media use in science presents significant challenges. The potential benefits of addressing these challenges and developing new social media tools include greater transparency, access, and engagement-and could nurture the public's trust. Stem Cells Translational Medicine 2019;8:1226&1229.
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.