ArticleBMC medical education2022
A Twitter-facilitated professional learning community: online participation, connectedness, and satisfaction.
Article in BMC medical education, 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.
- Mapping Five Years of #FOAMed: Trends, Engagement, and Shifting Topics on Twitter/X.The western journal of emergency medicine · 2025Article
- Development, Implementation, and Evaluation of a Virtual MedTwitter Curriculum for Medical Students.Medical science educator · 2024Article
- U-shaped association between online information exchange and app usage frequency: a large-scale survey of China 's online young and middle-aged people with pre diabetes and diabetes.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2023Article
- A Qualitative Exploration of COVID+ Learning Network Webinars: Healthcare Learnings at Pace in a State of Rapid Change.Journal of primary care & community healthArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTwitter has gained increasing popularity and attention as a professional learning environment to share knowledge, exchange information, make connections, and build networks. To evaluate the effectiveness of Twitter-facilitated online discussions, a community of inquiry framework could be used with the three key elements of online environments: cognitive presence, social presence, and teaching presence. This study aims to explore how medical educators participate in synchronous online discussions on Twitter using #MedEdChat, and how participants' perceptions toward the three presences, sense of connectedness and interactions influenced their online satisfaction.
methodsA survey invitation was emailed using the medical education email list DR-ED and was posted during the weekly Twitter conversations in December 2020, to solicit participants who have been involved in any kind of #MedEdChat activities (i.e., read transcripts or directly participate in discussions).
resultsA total of 68 people responded. Through descriptive analysis and path analysis, we found that almost half of the survey respondents were lurkers on #MedEdChat who read others' tweets or transcripts. In addition, participants mainly used Twitter for resource sharing, collaborating with others, and networking. Participants rated teaching (i.e., moderator) presence the highest, followed by overall satisfaction, cognitive presence, sense of connectedness, social presence, and interactions. Among them, sense of connectedness and cognitive presence were significantly associated with participants' overall satisfaction.
conclusionsThis study provided significant implications for using Twitter as a professional learning community to conduct online discussion activities. Facilitators could think of ways to improve participation by providing tutorials on how to participate on Twitter discussions, introduce or ask new participants to introduce themselves, facilitate discussion with intriguing questions, and invite medical educators of different roles as well as medical students and residents to join to bring in diverse perspectives.
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.