ReviewInternational journal of cardiology. Heart & vasculature2022
Researchers in cardiology - Why and how to get on Twitter?
Review in International journal of cardiology. Heart & vasculature, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Review
- Social media: Are Twitter/X influencers in cardiology really influencing?International journal of cardiology. Heart & vasculature · 2024Article
- The impact of Twitter/X promotion on visibility of research articles: Results of the #TweetTheJournal study.International journal of cardiology. Heart & vasculature · 2024Article
- 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Social media (SoMe) for professional use has gained importance for scientific impact. In cardiology, Twitter is among the preferred SoMe platforms for scientific dissemination. We are in the middle of a paradigm shift within scientific dissemination as more scientific content is presented on Twitter, and it is crucial to embrace it. Therefore, this paper includes a description and discussion of the existing literature reporting the impact of Twitter on research dissemination, as well as a guide on how to get started. In addition, we describe a case of the Danish Cardiovascular Academy Summer Meeting 2021 as an example of a scientific event that was promoted on Twitter before, during and after the event and present a survey showing that participants were inspired to increase the use of SoMe professionally. Finally, the paper addresses limitations of Twitter and SoMe for scientific use and discuss a need for an increased evidence base.
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.