ArticleAdvances in radiation oncology
Current Social Media Use Among Radiation Oncology Trainees.
Article in Advances in radiation oncology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Strategic Medical Student Engagement Enhances Knowledge, Interest, and Recruitment in Radiation Oncology.Cureus · 2026Article
- Integration of Social Media to Enhance Engagement With a Medical Education Website: A Content Analysis.Cureus · 2026Article
- Use of social media in radiation oncology: multicenter data from the GOCO Group.Reports of practical oncology and radiotherapy : journal of Greatpoland Cancer Center in Poznan and Polish Society of Radiation Oncology · 2024Article
- #radonc: Growth of the global radiation oncology Twitter network.Clinical and translational radiation oncology · 2021Article
- Article
- Characterizing Twitter Influencers in Radiation Oncology.Advances in radiation oncologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 8 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeResident physicians use social media (SM) for many reasons. We sought to characterize current SM use by radiation oncology (RO) trainees for education and professional development. METHODS AND MATERIALS: An anonymous 40-question survey was sent by e-mail to RO residents in the 2018 to 2019 academic year. SM platform use, time spent on SM, professional use, and opinions regarding SM use were assessed. Descriptive statistics and a univariate logistic regression analysis were performed to identify factors associated with perceptions of SM and spending >25% of SM time for academic or professional purposes.
resultsOf the 615 residents surveyed, 149 responded (24% response rate). Facebook (73%), theMednet (62%), Instagram (59%), Twitter (57%), and Doximity (50%) were the top SM platforms used. Most respondents (53%) reported <25% of overall SM time on professional/academic purposes, and 21% reported using SM >60 minutes per day over the past week. Residents with an RO mentor on SM (n = 35; 24%; odds ratio [OR]: 2.79; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.29-6.08;
conclusionsMost RO residents reported that SM provides novel educational content and can help with career development. Potential disadvantages of SM for trainees may include distraction and pressure to maintain a SM presence. SM use by RO trainees merits further research to optimize its potential for education and professional development.
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.