Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33199305›Full record

ArticleBJGP open2021

Look who's talking now: Cancer in primary care on Twitter. An observational study.

Kristi M Milley, Sophie A Chima, Kara-Lynne Cummings, Jon D Emery

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BJGP open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 16% of its field
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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Observational
  5. Article
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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Kristi M MilleyPrimary Care Collaborative Cancer Clinical Trials Group, Centre for Cancer Research and Department of General Practice, Faculty of Medicine, Dentistry and Health Sciences, University of Melbourne, Victorian Comprehensive Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Australia kristi.milley@unimelb.edu.au.
Sophie A ChimaPrimary Care Collaborative Cancer Clinical Trials Group, Centre for Cancer Research and Department of General Practice, Faculty of Medicine, Dentistry and Health Sciences, University of Melbourne, Victorian Comprehensive Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Australia.
Kara-Lynne CummingsPrimary Care Collaborative Cancer Clinical Trials Group, Centre for Cancer Research and Department of General Practice, Faculty of Medicine, Dentistry and Health Sciences, University of Melbourne, Victorian Comprehensive Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Australia.
Jon D EmeryPrimary Care Collaborative Cancer Clinical Trials Group, Centre for Cancer Research and Department of General Practice, Faculty of Medicine, Dentistry and Health Sciences, University of Melbourne, Victorian Comprehensive Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Australia.
Victorian Comprehensive Cancer Centre · AUCancer Clinic · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTwitter is a microblogging platform that helps share information. It is a dynamic tool that has been embraced by many user types including consumers and healthcare professionals (HCPs). Currently, there are no data on how cancer in primary care features on Twitter.

aimTo explore the type of users and information shared about cancer in primary care on Twitter. DESIGN &

settingA descriptive exploratory study took place of publicly available Twitter data.

methodTweets were searched between July 2015 and June 2017 for 'GP', 'general practice', 'primary care', or 'general practitioner' in conjunction with 'cancer'. A 20% random sample was coded for geographic location, user type, type of tweet, and theme. Tweet sentiment was analysed using R package sentimentr. Content that gained traction was compared by combining original tweets, retweets, favourites, and duration.

resultsThere were a total of 3413 tweets from 1611 users in 44 countries. Consumers were the largest user group followed by health organisations, healthcare professionals, and the media. The most common theme across user types was diagnostic delay. Other themes that emerged included cancer screening, symptom awareness, and early diagnosis. Consumers published more negative tweets, particularly in relation to diagnostic delay. Health organisations focused on symptom awareness and screening. Over half of media tweets were stories that featured delayed diagnosis or screening.

conclusionA broad range of users engage with Twitter to share information about cancer in primary care. Content is different between user groups, but diagnostic delay and symptom awareness are common themes. Healthcare and professional organisations may need to consider approaches to counter negative messages about diagnostic delay.

Indexed as

cancergeneral practitionersneoplasmsprimary health caresocial mediatwitter

Identifiers

PMID33199305
PMCPMC7960530
OpenAlexW3102306145

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.