ArticleEmergency radiology2021
Diagnosis in a snap: a pilot study using Snapchat in radiologic didactics.
Article in Emergency radiology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Social media for cardiac imagers: a review.European heart journal. Cardiovascular Imaging · 2024Review
- Evolution in Congenital Cardiology Education: The Rise of Digital-Learning Tools.CJC pediatric and congenital heart disease · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo evaluate Snapchat, an image-based social media platform, as a tool for emergency radiologic didactics comparing image interpretation on mobile devices with conventional analysis on a classroom screen. MATERIALS AND
methodsSeven radiology residents (4 juniors, 3 seniors;4 males, 3 females; 28.4 years old, ± 1.7 years) were shown 5 emergent radiologic cases using Snapchat and 5 cases of similar content and duration on a classroom projector over 4 weeks. All images depicted diagnoses requiring immediate communication to ordering physicians. Performance was scored 0-2 (0 = complete miss, 1 = major finding, but missed the diagnosis, 2 = correct diagnosis) by two attending radiologists in consensus.
resultsAll residents performed better on Snapchat each week. In weeks 1-4, juniors scored 21/40 (52.5%), 23/40 (57.5%), 19/40 (47.5%), and 18/40 (45%) points using Snapchat compared with 13/40 (32.5%), 23/40 (57.5%), 14/40 (35%), and 13/40 (32.5%), respectively, each week by projector, while seniors scored 19/30 (63.3%), 21/30 (70%), 27/30 (90%), and 21/30 (70%) on Snapchat versus 16/30 (53.3%), 19/30 (63.3%), 20/30 (66.7%), and 20/30 (66.7%) on projector. Four-week totals showed juniors scoring 81/160 (50.6%) on Snapchat and 63/160 (39.4%) by projector compared with seniors scoring 88/120 (73.3%) and 75/120 (62.5%), respectively. Performance on Snapchat was statistically, significantly better than via projector during weeks 1 and 3 (p values 0.0019 and 0.0031).
conclusionRadiology residents interpreting emergency cases via Snapchat showed higher accuracy compared with using a traditional classroom screen. This pilot study suggests that Snapchat may have a role in the digital radiologic classroom's evolution.
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.