ArticlemedRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences2020
COVID-19: An analysis of social media and research publication activity during the early stages of the pandemic.
Article in medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Updated by
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the importance of rapid dissemination of scientific and medical discovery. Social media (SoMe) has become an invaluable platform in science and medicine. This study analyzed activity of SoMe (Twitter), preprints, and publications related to COVID-19 and gastroenterology (GI) during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: Data from Twitter, preprint servers and PubMed was collected and analyzed from December 2019 through May 2020. Global and regional geographic and gastrointestinal organ specific social media trends were compared to preprint and publication activity; any associations were identified. Results: Over the 6-month period, there were 73,079 tweets from 44,609 users, 7,164 publications, and 4,702 preprints. Twitter activity peaked during March while preprints and publications peaked in April 2020. Strong correlations were identified between Twitter and both preprints and publications activity (p<0.001 for both). While COVID-19 data across the 3 platforms concentrated on pulmonology/critical care, the majority of GI tweets pertained to pancreatology, most publications focused on hepatology, and most preprints covered hepatology and luminal GI (LGI). There were significant associations between Twitter activity and research for all GI subfields (p=0.009 for LGI, p=0.006 for hepatology and IBD, p=0.007 for endoscopy), except pancreatology (p=0.2). Twitter activity was highest in the US (7,331 tweets) whereas PubMed activity was highest in China (1,768 publications). Conclusions: The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the utility of SoMe as a vehicle for disseminating scientific information during a public health crisis. Scientists and clinicians should consider the use of SoMe in augmenting public awareness of their scholarly pursuits.
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.