ArticleInternational journal of spine surgery2025
Synergizing Digital and Print: Leveraging Spine Surgeons' Social Media to Transform Publishing and Society Interaction.
Article in International journal of spine surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
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
backgroundSocial media has fundamentally altered how information is created, disseminated, and consumed, with growing impact on spine surgeons and professional societies. Traditional academic publishing remains the standard for research validation, but digital platforms now shape much of the real-time dialogue in spine care.
objectiveTo explore strategies for integrating spine surgeons' social media presence with traditional publishing channels to enhance knowledge dissemination, support clinical innovation, and improve member engagement within spine societies.
methodsThis perspective reviews current patterns of social media use among spine surgeons, focusing on platforms such as X (formerly Twitter), Instagram, and LinkedIn. It analyzes benefits (reach, speed, interactivity) and challenges (variable quality, lack of peer review, potential bias), and proposes a conceptual hybrid model in which social media and peer-reviewed journals function in a complementary rather than competitive manner.
resultsSocial media enables rapid sharing of clinical insights, techniques, and innovations, and facilitates engagement with both peers and patients. However, it often privileges observational data, lower-level evidence, and real-world experiences that do not easily fit into traditional high-level evidence frameworks. A hybrid approach is proposed in which professional societies (1) formally recognize curated social media content as a feeder for peer-reviewed work; (2) create more inclusive forums for lower-level evidence and case-based discussions; and (3) intentionally link digital dialogues to structured academic outputs.
conclusionsBy aligning the dynamic, interactive nature of social media with the rigor and credibility of traditional publishing, spine societies can foster greater member engagement, accelerate innovation, and reinforce their role as thought leaders. A deliberate, hybrid communication strategy can bridge the gap between digital and print, creating a more collaborative and inclusive platform for advancing spine surgery. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Integrating social media with traditional publishing can accelerate the dissemination of practical, real-world clinical insights, ultimately enhancing surgeon education and improving patient care in spine surgery. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 5:
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.