Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33866307›Full record

Observational studyJournal of medical Internet research2021

Characterization of an Open-Access Medical News Platform's Readership During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Retrospective Observational Study.

Alex K Chan, Constance Wu, Andrew Cheung, Marc D Succi

Abstract readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in Journal of medical Internet research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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.

Alex K ChanMichael G. DeGroote School of Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-2872-4874
Constance WuHarvard Medical School, Boston, MA, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-2996-1505
Andrew CheungMichael G. DeGroote School of Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-5876-3487
Marc D SucciMedically Engineered Solutions in Healthcare Incubator, Innovation in Operations Research Center, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-1518-3984

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThere are many alternatives to direct journal access, such as podcasts, blogs, and news sites, that allow physicians and the general public to stay up to date with medical literature. However, there is a scarcity of literature that investigates the readership characteristics of open-access medical news sites and how these characteristics may have shifted during the COVID-19 pandemic.

objectiveThis study aimed to assess readership and survey data to characterize open-access medical news readership trends related to the COVID-19 pandemic and overall readership trends regarding pandemic-related information delivery.

methodsAnonymous, aggregate readership data were obtained from 2 Minute Medicine, an open-access, physician-run medical news organization that has published over 8000 original, physician-written texts and visual summaries of new medical research since 2013. In this retrospective observational study, the average number of article views, number of actions (defined as the sum of the number of views, shares, and outbound link clicks), read times, and bounce rates (probability of leaving a page in <30 s) were compared between COVID-19 articles published from January 1 to May 31, 2020 (n=40) and non-COVID-19 articles (n=145) published in the same time period. A voluntary survey was also sent to subscribed 2 Minute Medicine readers to further characterize readership demographics and preferences, which were scored on a Likert scale.

resultsCOVID-19 articles had a significantly higher median number of views than non-COVID-19 articles (296 vs 110; U=748.5; P<.001). There were no significant differences in average read times (P=.12) or bounce rates (P=.12). Non-COVID-19 articles had a higher median number of actions than COVID-19 articles (2.9 vs 2.5; U=2070.5; P=.02). On a Likert scale of 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree), our survey data revealed that 65.5% (78/119) of readers agreed or strongly agreed that they preferred staying up to date with emerging literature about COVID-19 by using sources such as 2 Minute Medicine instead of journals. A greater proportion of survey respondents also indicated that open-access news sources were one of their primary sources for staying informed (86/120, 71.7%) compared to the proportion who preferred direct journal article access (61/120, 50.8%). The proportion of readers indicating they were reading one or less full-length medical studies a month were lower following introduction to 2 Minute Medicine compared to prior (21/120, 17.5% vs 38/120, 31.6%; P=.005).

conclusionsThe readership significantly increased for one open-access medical literature platform during the pandemic. This reinforces the idea that open-access, physician-written sources of medical news represent an important alternative to direct journal access for readers who want to stay up to date with medical literature.

Indexed as

COVID-19ReadingSurveys and QuestionnairesAdultAgedBiomedical ResearchFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedOpen Access PublishingPandemicsRetrospective StudiesYoung AdultCOVID-19cross-sectionalinternetliteraturemediamedical newsnewsopen accessreadership trendssurveytext summariestrendweb-based health information

Identifiers

PMID33866307
PMCPMC8153036

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.