Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34652279›Full record

Observational studyJournal of medical Internet research2021

The Association Between Professional Accounts on Social Networks Twitter and ResearchGate and the Number of Scientific Publications and Citations Among Anesthesia Researchers: Observational Study.

Thomas Clavier, Emilie Occhiali, Zoé Demailly, Vincent Compère, Benoit Veber, Jean Selim, Emmanuel Besnier

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 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

7 authors.

Thomas ClavierDepartment of Anesthesiology, Critical Care and Perioperative Medicine, Rouen University Hospital, Rouen, France.ORCID 0000-0001-8630-7537
Emilie OcchialiDepartment of Anesthesiology, Critical Care and Perioperative Medicine, Rouen University Hospital, Rouen, France.ORCID 0000-0003-2364-8662
Zoé DemaillyDepartment of Anesthesiology, Critical Care and Perioperative Medicine, Rouen University Hospital, Rouen, France.ORCID 0000-0001-9768-0193
Vincent CompèreDepartment of Anesthesiology, Critical Care and Perioperative Medicine, Rouen University Hospital, Rouen, France.ORCID 0000-0001-5977-7090
Benoit VeberDepartment of Anesthesiology, Critical Care and Perioperative Medicine, Rouen University Hospital, Rouen, France.ORCID 0000-0002-5938-7284
Jean SelimDepartment of Anesthesiology, Critical Care and Perioperative Medicine, Rouen University Hospital, Rouen, France.ORCID 0000-0002-1395-1601
Emmanuel BesnierDepartment of Anesthesiology, Critical Care and Perioperative Medicine, Rouen University Hospital, Rouen, France.ORCID 0000-0002-0267-0986

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSocial networks are now essential tools for promoting research and researchers. However, there is no study investigating the link between presence or not on professional social networks and scientific publication or citation for a given researcher.

objectiveThe objective of this study was to study the link between professional presence on social networks and scientific publications/citations among anesthesia researchers.

methodsWe included all the French full professors and associate professors of anesthesia. We analyzed their presence on the social networks Twitter (professional account with ≥1 tweet over the 6 previous months) and ResearchGate. We extracted their bibliometric parameters for the 2016-2020 period via the Web of Science Core Collection (Clarivate Analytics) database in the Science Citation Index-Expanded index.

resultsA total of 162 researchers were analyzed; 42 (25.9%) had an active Twitter account and 110 (67.9%) a ResearchGate account. There was no difference between associate professors and full professors regarding active presence on Twitter (8/23 [35%] vs. 34/139 [24.5%], respectively; P=.31) or ResearchGate (15/23 [65%] vs. 95/139 [68.3%], respectively; P=.81). Researchers with an active Twitter account (median [IQR]) had more scientific publications (45 [28-61] vs. 26 [12-41]; P<.001), a higher h-index (12 [8-16] vs. 8 [5-11]; P<.001), a higher number of citations per publication (12.54 [9.65-21.8] vs. 10.63 [5.67-16.10]; P=.01), and a higher number of citations (563 [321-896] vs. 263 [105-484]; P<.001). Researchers with a ResearchGate account (median [IQR]) had more scientific publications (33 [17-47] vs. 26 [9-43]; P=.03) and a higher h-index (9 [6-13] vs. 8 [3-11]; P=.03). There was no difference between researchers with a ResearchGate account and those without it concerning the number of citations per publication and overall number of citations. In multivariate analysis including sex, academic status, and presence on social networks, the presence on Twitter was associated with the number of publications (β=20.2; P<.001), the number of citations (β=494.5; P<.001), and the h-index (β=4.5; P<.001).

conclusionsAmong French anesthesia researchers, an active presence on Twitter is associated with higher scientific publication and citations.

Indexed as

AnesthesiaSocial MediaBibliometricsHumansPublicationsResearch PersonnelSocial NetworkingacademicanesthesiabibliometricscitationpublicationresearcherResearchGateresearch outputsocial mediasocial networkTwitter

Identifiers

PMID34652279
PMCPMC8556638

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.