ArticleJMIR medical education2021
Audience of Academic Otolaryngology on Twitter: Cross-sectional Study.
Article in JMIR medical education, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Residency Rewired: An Analysis of Otolaryngology Residency Programs on Websites and Social Media.Laryngoscope investigative otolaryngology · 2025Article
- A Scoping Review of Physician Advocacy on Twitter.Cureus · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDespite the ubiquity of social media, the utilization and audience reach of this communication method by otolaryngology-head and neck surgery (OHNS) residency programs has not been investigated.
objectiveThe purpose of this study was to evaluate the content posted to a popular social media platform (Twitter) by OHNS residency programs.
methodsIn this cross-sectional study, we identified Twitter accounts for accredited academic OHNS residency programs. Tweets published over a 6-month period (March to August 2019) were extracted. Tweets were categorized and analyzed for source (original versus retweet) and target audience (medical versus layman). A random sample of 100 tweets was used to identify patterns of content, which were then used to categorize additional tweets. We quantified the total number of likes or retweets by health care professionals.
resultsOf the 121 accredited programs, 35 (28.9%) had Twitter accounts. Of the 2526 tweets in the 6-month period, 1695 (67.10%) were original-content tweets. The majority of tweets (1283/1695, 75.69%) were targeted toward health care workers, most of which did not directly contain medical information (954/1283, 74.36%). These tweets contained information about the department's trainees and education (349/954, 36.6%), participation at conferences (263/954, 27.6%), and research publications (112/954, 11.7%). Two-thirds of all tweets did not contain medical information. Medical professionals accounted for 1249/1362 (91.70%) of retweets and 5616/6372 (88.14%) of likes on original-content tweets.
conclusionsThe majority of Twitter usage by OHNS residency programs is for intra and interprofessional communication, and only a minority of tweets contain information geared toward the public. Communication and information sharing with patients is not the focus of OHNS departments on Twitter.
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.