Staying updated on COVID-19: Social media to amplify science in thrombosis and hemostasis.

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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

1. A Social Network Analysis of Twitter Data Related to Blood Clots and Vaccines.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
   Article
2. Recent Randomized Trials of Antithrombotic Therapy for Patients With COVID-19: JACC State-of-the-Art Review.Journal of the American College of Cardiology · 2021
   Review
3. Innovation via social media - The importance of Twitter to science.Research and practice in thrombosis and haemostasis · 2021
   Article
4. Staying updated on COVID-19: Social media to amplify science in thrombosis and hemostasis.Research and practice in thrombosis and haemostasis · 2020
   Article

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 at 1 institution in 1 country.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

Abstract

Indexed as