ArticleJMIR formative research2025
Research Dissemination Strategies in Pediatric Emergency Care Using a Professional Twitter (X) Account: A Mixed Methods Developmental Study of a Logic Model Framework.
Article in JMIR formative research, 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundResearch dissemination is a vital step in bridging the gap between the publication of cutting-edge research and its adoption into clinical practice. Social media platforms like Twitter (rebranded as X) offer promising channels for dissemination, yet research organizations lack clear guidance on establishing a professional social media presence. We present a structured framework based on our research network's multiyear experience developing a Twitter account for research dissemination.
objectiveThis study aimed to provide a roadmap for organizations aiming to create a professional Twitter account for research dissemination.
methodsThis was a mixed methods study analyzing the Pediatric Emergency Care Applied Research Network (PECARN) Twitter team's 4-year experience (2020-2023) with building a social media account. Using the nominal group technique qualitative approach, we recorded insights from the 6 team members' experiences in a round-robin fashion until response saturation. In addition, we analyzed internal Slack (Slack Technologies) communications to identify key developmental events. Together, these were then prioritized by consensus to elucidate key developmental events that enhanced both social media and scientific engagement. This process was informed by quantitative data from Twitter performance metrics and Altmetric Attention Scores for journal publications collected over a 39-month period. Together, these elements informed the design of a logic model framework.
resultsThe nominal group technique generated 63 thematic statements which included issues such as organizational structure, content strategy, technologies, analytics, organizational priorities, and challenges. These statements coalesced into the 7 domains (priorities, assumptions, inputs, outputs, outcomes, and external factors) that comprise the logic model. Inputs included organizational support (eg, executive-level champion and funding), specialized personnel (eg, content writer and analytics manager), and operational technologies (eg, communications and data analytics tools). Outputs encompassed targeted activities, such as engaging with other Twitter accounts, publishing high-quality tweets highlighting scholarly work, and developing a dynamic operations manual for the Twitter team. Outcomes were measured through tweet metrics, account analytics, and article-level impact scores.
conclusionsOur logic model roadmap, based on our practical multiyear experience and data-driven strategies, can serve as a guide for research organizations or medical institutions aiming to incorporate Twitter or other social media platforms for research dissemination.
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.