ReviewBJU international2025
Urologists and social media: pitfalls and perils and what to think about before hitting 'send'.
Review in BJU international, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
objectiveTo summarise current guidelines from professional bodies relevant to urologists on social media, and to discusses a range of risks associated with social media use. These include the risk of a fitness to practise investigation, breaking the law, loss of employment, and personal risk in the form of harassment and doxxing.
methodsReview of guidelines and recommendations published by professional bodies revelant to urologists and review of relevant case examples in the medical profession and other relevant professions.
resultsThis article finds whereas most doctors will be aware of the risks of posting on public social media platforms, the recent case studies in medical and other contexts have highlighted the risks of disciplinary action from regulators and even criminal investigation in the use of private social media.
conclusionAlthough the majority of urologists are unlikely to violate ethical and good medical practice principles in their use of social media, this article serves as a reminder of the potential consequences based on real-life case examples.
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.