ArticleArthroscopy, sports medicine, and rehabilitation2022
Social Media in Hip Arthroscopy Is an Underused Resource That Enhances Physician Online Reputation.
Article in Arthroscopy, sports medicine, and rehabilitation, 2022. 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.
- The Impact of Social Media for Adult Reconstruction Surgeons: A Prevalence Study With Online and Academic Reputations.Arthroplasty today · 2026Article
- Identifying Hip Arthroscopy Trends in Turkey.Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine · 2024Article
- Perceptions of social media utilization among orthopaedic foot and ankle surgeons.Journal of foot and ankle research · 2023Article
- Positive Association Between Online Attention and the Bibliometric Impact of Shoulder Instability Publications.Arthroscopy, sports medicine, and rehabilitation · 2022Review
- Use of Social Media in Orthopaedic Surgery Training and Practice: A Systematic Review.JB & JS open accessReview
- Evaluation of Social Media Utilization Among Members of the Musculoskeletal Tumor Society: Implications in Practice.JB & JS open accessArticle
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
Purpose: To analyze the impact of professional social media (SM) presence, activity level, and physician practice-specific variables on online ratings and rating frequency for hip arthroscopists across 3 leading physician review websites (PRWs). Methods: The Arthroscopy Association of North America and American Orthopaedic Society of Sports Medicine directories were queried to identify practicing hip arthroscopists. Physicians included were residency-trained surgeons practicing within the United States. Surgeon ratings, comments, and reviews were compiled from 3 PRWs (Google, Healthgrades, Vitals). Google searches assessed for professional Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram accounts and demographic information. Surgeons were considered active if they posted the month before data collection. Logistical regression and a univariate model analyzed effects of demographic factors and other variables on SM use and PRW statistics. Results: In total, 555 surgeons met inclusion criteria (93.2% male, 6.8% female); 41% had a professional SM account (27.4% Facebook, 24.3% Twitter, 12.1% Instagram). Few surgeons with SM actively posted (30.5% Facebook, 43.7% Twitter, 37.3% Instagram). Surgeons with any SM had significantly greater number of ratings on all review websites ( Conclusions: Most hip arthroscopists have no professional SM, and fewer frequently post content. SM presence significantly increases the number of ratings on PRWs but does not affect overall rating. Surgeons using SM practice in more populous cities with more competition. Academic surgeons had fewer ratings and lower average ratings. A professional Instagram account can increase the number of online ratings. Clinical Relevance: Understanding how SM presence affects an orthopaedic surgeon's practice may provide information on how surgeons best connect with patients.
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.