ArticleLaryngoscope investigative otolaryngology2024
A quantitative analysis of Twitter ("X") trends in the discussion of rhinoplasty.
Article in Laryngoscope investigative otolaryngology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Clarifying the Role of Isotretinoin in Rhinoplasty: A Systematic Review and Analysis of an Emerging Social Media Trend.Aesthetic plastic surgery · 2026Pooled it
- Assessment of Postoperative Satisfaction in Patients Following Rhinoplasty: A Cross-sectional Study.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2025Article
- Applications of Natural Language Processing in Otolaryngology: A Scoping Review.The Laryngoscope · 2025Article
- A quantitative analysis of Twitter ("X") trends in the discussion of rhinoplasty.Laryngoscope investigative otolaryngology · 2024Article
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Rhinoplasty is one of the most common cosmetic surgical procedures performed globally. Twitter, also known as "X," is used by both patients and physicians and has been studied as a useful tool for analyzing trends in healthcare. The public social media discourse of rhinoplasty has not been previously reported in the field of otolaryngology. The goal of this study was to characterize the most common user type, sentiment, and temporal trends in the discussion of rhinoplasty on Twitter to guide facial plastic surgeons in their clinical and social media practices. Methods: A total of 1,427,015 tweets published from 2015 to 2020 containing the keywords "rhinoplasty" or "nose job" were extracted using Twitter Academic API. Tweets were standardized and filtered for spam and duplication. Natural language processing (NLP) algorithms and data visualization techniques were applied to characterize tweets. Results: Significantly more "nose job" tweets (80.8%) were published compared with "rhinoplasty" (19.2%). Annual tweet frequency increased over the 5 years, with "rhinoplasty" tweets peaking in January and "nose job" tweets peaking in the summer and winter months. Most "rhinoplasty" tweets were linked to a surgeon or medical practice source, while most "nose job" tweets were from isolated laypersons. While discussion was positive in sentiment overall ( Conclusions: Rhinoplasty-related posts on Twitter were cumulatively positive in sentiment and tweet volume is steadily increasing over time, especially during popular holiday months. The search term "nose job" yields significantly more results than "rhinoplasty," and is the preferred term of non-healthcare users. We found a large digital contribution from surgeons and medical practices, particularly in the non-academic and private practice sector, utilizing Twitter for promotional purposes.
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.