Health Risk Communication During COVID-19 Emergency in Italy: The Impact of Medical Experts' Debate on Twitter

The COVID-19 emergency underlined the importance of an effective public health communication to limit the spread of the outbreak. Physicians as "public experts" can play a crucial part in health risk communication, even if their role is challenged by transformations into the information system. Therefore, the major objective of this study was to investigate public perception of medical experts' opinions regarding the COVID-19 emergency. The Italian public debate involving medical experts in the Twitter sphere during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has particularly been examined. A content analysis was performed on 2,040 randomly selected tweets. The results of content analysis show that the medical experts who tend to mitigate the risk received a higher number of tweets supporting their positions when compared to the experts whose statements were aimed at intensifying the risk. Since a public expert is a communicator, but also an advisor who can affect how laypersons perceive and react to risk events, this study can provide more knowledge about the public perception of different communication strategies incorporated by medical experts.

Controlled experiment finds no detectable citation bump from Twitter promotion

Multiple studies across a variety of scientific disciplines have shown that the number of times that a paper is shared on Twitter (now called X) is correlated with the number of citations that paper receives. However, these studies were not designed to answer whether tweeting about scientific papers causes an increase in citations, or whether they were simply highlighting that some papers have higher relevance, importance or quality and are therefore both tweeted about more and cited more. The authors of this study are leading science communicators on Twitter from several life science disciplines, with substantially higher follower counts than the average scientist, making us uniquely placed to address this question. We conducted a three-year-long controlled experiment, randomly selecting five articles published in the same month and journal, and randomly tweeting one while retaining the others as controls. This process was repeated for 10 articles from each of 11 journals, recording Altmetric scores, number of tweets, and citation counts before and after tweeting. Randomization tests revealed that tweeted articles were downloaded 2.6-3.9 times more often than controls immediately after tweeting, and retained significantly higher Altmetric scores (+81%) and number of tweets (+105%) three years after tweeting. However, while some tweeted papers were cited more than their respective control papers published in the same journal and month, the overall increase in citation counts after three years (+7% for Web of Science and +12% for Google Scholar) was not statistically significant (p > 0.15). Therefore while discussing science on social media has many professional and societal benefits (and has been a lot of fun), increasing the citation rate of a scientist's papers is likely not among them.

The effects of self-disclosure and gender on a climate scientist's credibility and likability on social media

To examine whether different types of disclosure made by climate scientists on social media influence perceived source credibility (i.e. competence, integrity, benevolence) and likability, we conducted a 2 (self-disclosure type: personal vs political) × 3 (proportion of posts including a self-disclosure: 20% vs 50% vs 80%) × 2 (gender identity of scientist: male vs female) between-subjects experiment (N = 734). We found that people liked the scientist more for a personal than political disclosure, rated them as being more competent for a political disclosure, and liked a female scientist more than a male scientist. However, scientist's gender did not moderate the effect of disclosure type or the effect of participants' gender. Our results suggest distinct benefits when scientists deliver different types of messages on social media, although disclosure is unlikely to have substantial effects on lay judgments of scientists' credibility.

Shaping Policy and Practice: Analyzing the Reach of Highly Cited and High Altmetrics Publications for Broader Impact on Physical Activity

BACKGROUND

A significant gap remains between the availability of physical activity (PA) evidence-based interventions and their application in real-world settings in policy and practice areas. This study aims to describe highly cited and high altmetrics publications in PA research and explore their impact on PA policy and practice.

METHODS

Mixed-methods sequential explanatory study including the identification and description of the top highly cited and high altmetrics PA publications from the last 10 years (including study design, population, type of PA study, number of citations, and altmetrics score), and interviews with key informants regarding research dissemination and implications on PA policy and practice.

RESULTS

When considering publication type, the most frequent highly cited publications were health consequences (40%, altmetrics = 42%), measurement/trends (23%, altmetrics = 10%), and correlates/determinants (21%, altmetrics = 26%) studies. They were predominantly cross-sectional (50%, altmetrics = 28%), systematic reviews (38%, altmetrics = 18%), and longitudinal studies (8%, altmetrics = 37%). All authors who participated in the interviews agreed that the most important factors in disseminating findings and influencing PA policy and practice were the published peer-reviewed manuscript itself, the reputation of the journal, the communication strategy, and the use of online platforms.

CONCLUSIONS

To have a real-world influence on PA policy and practice, it is not enough to publish the results in scientific journals and participate in media outreach. To successfully involve policymakers and communities in appropriating the evidence and evaluating the extent to which these findings affect policy and practice outcomes, it is critical to lead co-creation, co-dissemination, advocacy, and capacity building efforts.

Characterizing Precision Nutrition Discourse on Twitter: Quantitative Content Analysis

BACKGROUND

It is possible that tailoring dietary approaches to an individual's genomic profile could provide optimal dietary inputs for biological functioning and support adherence to dietary management protocols. The science required for such nutrigenetic and nutrigenomic profiling is not yet considered ready for broad application by the scientific and medical communities; however, many personalized nutrition products are available in the marketplace, creating the potential for hype and misleading information on social media. Twitter provides a unique big data source that provides real-time information. Therefore, it has the potential to disseminate evidence-based health information, as well as misinformation.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to characterize the landscape of precision nutrition content on Twitter, with a specific focus on nutrigenetics and nutrigenomics. We focused on tweet authors, types of content, and presence of misinformation.

METHODS

Twitter Archiver was used to capture tweets from September 1, 2020, to December 1, 2020, using keywords related to nutrition and genetics. A random sample of tweets was coded using quantitative content analysis by 4 trained coders. Codebook-driven, quantified information about tweet authors, content details, information quality, and engagement metrics were compiled and analyzed.

RESULTS

The most common categories of tweets were precision nutrition products and nutrigenomic concepts. About a quarter (132/504, 26.2%) of tweet authors presented themselves as science experts, medicine experts, or both. Nutrigenetics concepts most frequently came from authors with science and medicine expertise, and tweets about the influence of genes on weight were more likely to come from authors with neither type of expertise. A total of 14.9% (75/504) of the tweets were noted to contain untrue information; these were most likely to occur in the nutrigenomics concepts topic category.

CONCLUSIONS

By evaluating social media discourse on precision nutrition on Twitter, we made several observations about the content available in the information environment through which individuals can learn about related concepts and products. Tweet content was consistent with the indicators of medical hype, and the inclusion of potentially misleading and untrue information was common. We identified a contingent of users with scientific and medical expertise who were active in discussing nutrigenomics concepts and products and who may be encouraged to share credible expert advice on precision nutrition and tackle false information as this technology develops.

Science communication on Twitter: Measuring indicators of engagement and their links to user interaction in communication scholars' Tweet content

Scientists increasingly use Twitter for communication about science. The microblogging service has been heralded for its potential to foster public engagement with science; thus, measuring how engaging, that is dialogue-oriented, tweet content is, has become a relevant research object. Tweet content designed in an engaging, dialogue-oriented way is also supposed to link to user interaction (e.g. liking, retweeting). The present study analyzed content-related and functional indicators of engagement in scientists' tweet content, applying content analysis to original tweets (n = 2884) of 212 communication scholars. Findings show that communication scholars tweet mostly about scientific topics, with, however, low levels of engagement. User interaction, nevertheless, correlated with content-related and functional indicators of engagement. The findings are discussed in light of their implications for public engagement with science.

Science communication in experimental biology: experiences and recommendations

During the century of Journal of Experimental Biology's existence, science communication has established itself as an interdisciplinary field of theory and practice. Guided by my experiences as a scientist and science writer, I argue that science communication skills are distinct from scientific communication skills and that engaging in science communication is particularly beneficial to early-career researchers; although taking on these dual roles is not without its difficulties, as I discuss in this Perspective. In the hope of encouraging more scientists to become science communicators, I provide: (i) general considerations for scientists looking to engage in science communication (knowing their audience, storytelling, avoiding jargon) and (ii) specific recommendations for crafting effective contributions on social media (content, packaging, engagement), an emerging, accessible and potentially impactful mode of science communication. Effective science communication can boost the work of experimental biologists: it can impact public opinion by incisively describing the consequences of the climate crisis and can raise social acceptance of fundamental research and experiments on animals.

Twitter trends in #Parasitology determined by text mining and topic modelling

This study investigated the emergence and use of Twitter, as of July 2023 being rebranded as X, as the main forum for social media communication in parasitology. A dataset of tweets was constructed using a keyword search of Twitter with the search terms 'malaria', 'Plasmodium', 'Leishmania', 'Trypanosoma', 'Toxoplasma' and 'Schistosoma' for the period from 2011 to 2020. Exploratory data analyses of tweet content were conducted, including language, usernames and hashtags. To identify parasitology topics of discussion, keywords and phrases were extracted using KeyBert and biterm topic modelling. The sentiment of tweets was analysed using VADER. The results show that the number of tweets including the keywords increased from 2011 (for malaria) and 2013 (for the others) to 2020, with the highest number of tweets being recorded in 2020. The maximum number of yearly tweets for Plasmodium, Leishmania, Toxoplasma, Trypanosoma and Schistosoma was recorded in 2020 (2804, 2161, 1570, 680 and 360 tweets, respectively). English was the most commonly used language for tweeting, although the percentage varied across the searches. In tweets mentioning Leishmania, only ∼37% were in English, with Spanish being more common. Across all the searches, Portuguese was another common language found. Popular tweets on Toxoplasma contained keywords relating to mental health including depression, anxiety and schizophrenia. The Trypanosoma tweets referenced drugs (benznidazole, nifurtimox) and vectors (bugs, triatomines, tsetse), while the Schistosoma tweets referenced areas of biology including pathology, eggs and snails. A wide variety of individuals and organisations were shown to be associated with Twitter activity. Many journals in the parasitology arena regularly tweet about publications from their journal, and professional societies promote activity and events that are important to them. These represent examples of trusted sources of information, often by experts in their fields. Social media activity of influencers, however, who have large numbers of followers, might have little or no training in science. The existence of such tweeters does raise cause for concern to parasitology, as one may start to question the quality of information being disseminated.

Neurofeedback on twitter: Evaluation of the scientific credibility and communication about the technique

Neurofeedback is a popular technique to induce neuroplasticity with a controversial reputation. The public discourse on neurofeedback, as a therapeutic and neuroenhancement technique, encompasses scientific communication, therapeutic expectations and outcomes, as well as complementary and alternative practices. We investigated twitter publications from 2010 to 2022 on the keyword "neurofeedback". A total of over 138 k tweets were obtained, which originated from over 42 k different users. The communication flow in the neurofeedback community is mainly unidirectional and non-interactive. Analysis of hashtags revealed application fields, therapy provider and neuroenhancement to be the most popular contents in neurofeedback communication. A group of 1221 productive users was identified, in which clinicians, entrepreneurs, broadcasters, and scientists contribute. We identified reactions to critical publications in the twitter traffic and an increase in the number of tweets by academic users which suggest an increase in the interest on the scientific credibility of neurofeedback. More intense scientific communication on neurofeedback in twitter may contribute to promote a more realistic view on challenges and advances regarding good scientific practice of neurofeedback.

Post or perish? Social media strategies for disseminating orthopedic research

Social media usage, particularly Twitter, among scientists in academia has increased in recent years. However, Twitter's use in scholarly post-publication dissemination of orthopaedic research and musculoskeletal advocacy remains low. To enhance usage of Twitter among musculoskeletal researchers, this article reviews data supporting the professional benefits of using the platform to disseminate scholarly works. Next, we provide a linear workflow for Tweet curation, discuss the importance of data-driven decision making behind tweet curation and posting, and propose new guidelines for professional Twitter usage. Since this workflow may not eliminate all the identified barriers and new institutionalized shifts in policies regarding curation and consumption of social media on Twitter, we also briefly introduce and explore using other social media platforms. We hope this information will be persuasive and compelling to those in the orthopedic research field and be broadly applicable to others in related scientific fields who wish to disseminate findings and engage a public audience on social media. In addition, we encourage the Orthopedic Research Society (ORS) and Journal of Orthopedic Research (JOR) communities to take advantage of the many tools curated by the Wiley editorial office and the ORS social media committee to increase dissemination of their scholarly works online. Twitter and social media can assist in accomplishing our mission of creating a world without musculoskeletal limitations via the timely dissemination of orthopedic information. However, this can only be accomplished if the orthopedic research community has a unified and strong online presence actively engaged in orthopaedic research findings and news.

Could the altmetrics wave bring a flood of confusion for anatomists?

Altmetrics are non-traditional metrics that can capture downloads, social media shares, and other modern measures of research impact and reach. Despite most of the altmetrics literature focusing on evaluating the relationship between research outputs and academic impact/influence, the perceived and actual value of altmetrics among academicians remains nebulous and inconsistent. This work proposes that ambiguities surrounding the value and use of altmetrics may be explained by a multiplicity of altmetrics definitions communicated by journal publishers. A root cause analysis was initiated to compare altmetrics definitions between anatomy and medical education journal publishers' websites and to determine the comparability of the measurement and platform sources used for computing altmetrics values. A scoping content analysis of data from across eight publishers' websites revealed wide variability in definitions and heterogeneity among altmetrics measurement sources. The incongruencies among publishers' altmetrics definitions and their value demonstrate that publishers may be one of the root cause of ambiguity perpetuating confusion around the value and use of altmetrics. This review highlights the need to more deeply explore the root causes of altmetrics ambiguities within academia and makes a compelling argument for establishing a ubiquitous altmetrics definition that is concise, clear, and specific.

Use of the Hashtag #DataSavesLives on Twitter: Exploratory and Thematic Analysis

Background

“Data Saves Lives” is a public engagement campaign that highlights the benefits of big data research and aims to establish public trust for this emerging research area.

Objective

This study explores how the hashtag #DataSavesLives is used on Twitter. We focused on the period when the UK government and its agencies adopted #DataSavesLives in an attempt to support their plans to set up a new database holding National Health Service (NHS) users’ medical data.

Methods

Public tweets published between April 19 and July 15, 2021, using the hashtag #DataSavesLives were saved using NCapture for NVivo 12. All tweets were coded twice. First, each tweet was assigned a positive, neutral, or negative attitude toward the campaign. Second, inductive thematic analysis was conducted. The results of the thematic analysis were mapped under 3 models of public engagement: deficit, dialogue, and participatory.

Results

Of 1026 unique tweets available for qualitative analysis, discussion around #DataSavesLives was largely positive (n=716, 69.8%) or neutral (n=276, 26.9%) toward the campaign with limited negative attitudes (n=34, 3.3%). Themes derived from the #DataSavesLives debate included ethical sharing, proactively engaging the public, coproducing knowledge with the public, harnessing potential, and gaining an understanding of big data research. The Twitter discourse was largely positive toward the campaign. The hashtag is predominantly used by similar-minded Twitter users to share information about big data projects and to spread positive messages about big data research when there are public controversies. The hashtag is generally used by organizations and people supportive of big data research. Tweet authors recognize that the public should be proactively engaged and involved in big data projects. The campaign remains UK centric. The results indicate that the communication around big data research is driven by the professional community and remains 1-way as members of the public rarely use the hashtag.

Conclusions

The results demonstrate the potential of social media but draws attention to hashtag usage being generally confined to “Twitter bubbles”: groups of similar-minded Twitter users.

Ecosystem Services: A Social and Semantic Network Analysis of Public Opinion on Twitter

Social media data reveal patterns of knowledge, attitudes, and behaviours of users on a range of topics. This study analysed 4398 tweets gathered between 17 January 2022 and 3 February 2022 related to ecosystem services, using the keyword and hashtag "ecosystem services". The Microsoft Excel plugin, NodeXL was used for social and semantic network analysis. The results reveal a loosely dense network in which information is conveyed slowly, with homogeneous, medium-sized subgroups typical of the community cluster structure. Citizens, NGOs, and governmental administrations emerged as the main gatekeepers of information in the network. Various semantic themes emerged such as the protection of natural capital for the sustainable production of ecosystem services; nature-based solutions to protect human structures and wellbeing against natural hazards; socio-ecological systems as the interaction between human beings and the environment; focus on specific services such as the storage of atmospheric CO₂ and the provision of food. In conclusion, the perception of social users of the role of ecosystem services can help policymakers and forest managers to outline and implement efficient forest management strategies and plans.

Understanding researchers’ Twitter uptake, activity and popularity—an analysis of applied research in Germany

Social media is opening up new avenues for disseminating research outputs. While prior literature points to the essential role of Twitter in this context, evidence on what determines variation in researchers´ Twitter engagement remains scarce. In this account-level study of Twitter usage, we consider how research productivity, research quality, and participation in academic conferences relate to Twitter uptake, activity and popularity, while also taking into account differences between academic disciplines. We use a population sample comprising data on Twitter engagement of researchers employed at the Fraunhofer-Gesellschaft, Europe´s largest applied research organization. We find that participation in academic conferences is strongly associated with Twitter uptake and popularity, but not with Twitter activity as such. We also find positive associations between research productivity and Twitter uptake as well as between research quality and popularity. Moreover, physicists use Twitter more than researchers from other disciplines, female researchers use Twitter less, and scientific age is negatively associated with Twitter activity. Our findings contribute to the literature on academic social media usage by providing indications for both push and pull mechanisms at play within social media research dissemination.

Engagement patterns with female and male scientists on Facebook

Social networks are becoming powerful agents mediating between science and the public. Considering the public tendency to associate science with men makes investigating representations of female scientists in social media important. Here we set out to find whether the commenting patterns to text-based science communication are similar. To examine these, we collected and analyzed posts (165) and their comments (10,006) published between 2016 and 2018 on an Israeli popular science Facebook page. We examined post characteristics as well as the relevance and sentiment of comments. Several gendered differences in commenting patterns emerged. Posts published by female scientists received more irrelevant and fewer relevant comments. Female scientists received more hostile and positive comments. These findings are consistent with results of previous research, but also demonstrate a more nuanced understanding that when female scientists write using scientific jargon (usually an unwanted feature of popular science writing), they received less hostile comments and were given less advice.

The (R)evolution of Social Media in Oncology: Engage, Enlighten, and Encourage

Summary:

Social media (SoMe) platforms have the ability to strengthen the oncology community, leading to intellectual connections that with time develop into friendships. SoMe has immense potential in all areas of medicine, and SoMe in oncology is proof of this, raising awareness about clinical trials, promoting cancer prevention techniques, amplifying oncology information, enabling diverse viewpoints into conversations, as well as educating colleagues regardless of geography.

Who tweets climate change papers? investigating publics of research through users’ descriptions

As social issues like climate change become increasingly salient, digital traces left by scholarly documents can be used to assess their reach outside of academia. Our research examine who shared climate change research papers on Twitter by looking at the expressions used in profile descriptions. We categorized users in eight categories (academia, communication, political, professional, personal, organization, bots and publishers) associated to specific expressions. Results indicate how diverse publics may be represented in the communication of scholarly documents on Twitter. Supplementing our word detection analysis with qualitative assessments of the results, we highlight how the presence of unique or multiple categorizations in textual Twitter descriptions provides evidence of the publics of research in specific contexts. Our results show a more substantial communication by academics and organizations for papers published in 2016, whereas the general public comparatively participated more in 2015. Overall, there is significant participation of publics outside of academia in the communication of climate change research articles on Twitter, although the extent to which these publics participate varies between individual papers. This means that papers circulate in specific communities which need to be assessed to understand the reach of research on social media. Furthermore, the flexibility of our method provide means for research assessment that consider the contextuality and plurality of publics involved on Twitter.

Introducing the EMPIRE Index: A novel, value-based metric framework to measure the impact of medical publications

Article-level measures of publication impact (alternative metrics or altmetrics) can help authors and other stakeholders assess engagement with their research and the success of their communication efforts. The wide variety of altmetrics can make interpretation and comparative assessment difficult; available summary tools are either narrowly focused or do not reflect the differing values of metrics from a stakeholder perspective. We created the EMPIRE (EMpirical Publication Impact and Reach Evaluation) Index, a value-based, multi-component metric framework for medical publications. Metric weighting and grouping were informed by a statistical analysis of 2891 Phase III clinical trial publications and by a panel of stakeholders who provided value assessments. The EMPIRE Index comprises three component scores (social, scholarly, and societal impact), each incorporating related altmetrics indicating a different aspect of engagement with the publication. These are averaged to provide a total impact score and benchmarked so that a score of 100 equals the mean scores of Phase III clinical trial publications in the New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) in 2016. Predictor metrics are defined to estimate likely long-term impact. The social impact component correlated strongly with the Altmetric Attention Score and the scholarly impact component correlated modestly with CiteScore, with the societal impact component providing unique insights. Analysis of fresh metrics collected 1 year after the initial dataset, including an independent sample, showed that scholarly and societal impact scores continued to increase, whereas social impact scores did not. Analysis of NEJM ‘notable articles’ showed that observational studies had the highest total impact and component scores, except for societal impact, for which surgical studies had the highest score. The EMPIRE Index provides a richer assessment of publication value than standalone traditional and alternative metrics and may enable medical researchers to assess the impact of publications easily and to understand what characterizes impactful research.

Retrospectively evidencing research impact using online data mining

Higher education institutions in the UK and elsewhere are under increasing pressure to measure the impact of their research, which can include how the research has increased scientific engagement among the general public. For various reasons, the need for evidence can arise months, or even years, after a particular research discovery has been made. Furthermore, the right kind of evidence is needed to indicate genuine changes in behaviour, knowledge or attitudes among a given target audience, which can be difficult to obtain after time has passed. In this article, we present a number of strategies for retrospective evidencing of ‘what happened and who cared’, illustrating their use to measure public engagement with example discoveries from up to five years ago.

Going rogue: what scientists can learn about Twitter communication from "alt" government accounts

The inauguration of President Trump in the United States led to the active restriction of science communication from federal agencies, resulting in the creation of many unofficial "alt" Twitter accounts to maintain communication. Alt accounts had many followers (e.g., 15 accounts had > 100,000) and received a large amount of media attention, making them ideal for better understanding how differences in messaging can affect public engagement with science on microblogging platforms. We analyzed tweets produced by alt and corresponding official agency accounts to compare the two groups and determine if specific features of a tweet made them more likely to be retweeted or liked to help the average scientist potentially reach a broader audience on Twitter. We found adding links, images, hashtags, and mentions, as well as expressing angry and annoying sentiments all increased retweets and likes. Evidence-based terms such as "peer-review" had high retweet rates but linking directly to peer-reviewed publications decreased attention compared to popular science websites. Word choice and attention did not reflect official or alt account types, indicating topic is more important than source. The number of tweets generated and attention received by alt accounts has decreased since their creation, demonstrating the importance of timeliness in science communication on social media. Together our results show potential pathways for scientists to increase efficacy in Twitter communications.

Credibility of scientific information on social media: Variation by platform, genre and presence of formal credibility cues

Responding to calls to take a more active role in communicating their research findings, scientists are increasingly using open online platforms, such as Twitter, to engage in science communication or to publicize their work. Given the ease with which misinformation spreads on these platforms, it is important for scientists to present their findings in a manner that appears credible. To examine the extent to which the online presentation of science information relates to its perceived credibility, we designed and conducted two surveys on Amazon’s Mechanical Turk. In the first survey, participants rated the credibility of science information on Twitter compared with the same information in other media, and in the second, participants rated the credibility of tweets with modified characteristics: presence of an image, text sentiment, and the number of likes/retweets. We find that similar information about scientific findings is perceived as less credible when presented on Twitter compared to other platforms, and that perceived credibility increases when presented with recognizable features of a scientific article. On a platform as widely distrusted as Twitter, use of these features may allow researchers who regularly use Twitter for research-related networking and communication to present their findings in the most credible formats.

Themes, communities and influencers of online probiotics chatter: A retrospective analysis from 2009-2017

We build on recent examinations questioning the quality of online information about probiotic products by studying the themes of content, detecting virtual communities and identifying key influencers in social media using data science techniques. We conducted topic modelling (n = 36,715 tweets) and longitudinal social network analysis (n = 17,834 tweets) of probiotic chatter on Twitter from 2009–17. We used Latent Dirichlet Allocation (LDA) to build the topic models and network analysis tool Gephi for building yearly graphs. We identified the top 10 topics of probiotics-related communication on Twitter and a constant rise in communication activity. However the number of communities grew consistently to peak in 2014 before dipping and levelling off by 2017. While several probiotics industry actors appeared and disappeared during this period, the influence of one specific actor rose from a hub initially to an authority in the latter years. With multi-brand advertising and probiotics promotions mostly occupying the Twitter chatter, scientists, journalists, or policymakers exerted minimal influence in these communities. Consistent with previous research, we find that probiotics-related content on social media veers towards promotions and benefits. Probiotic industry actors maintain consistent presence on Twitter while transitioning from hubs to authorities over time; scientific entities assume an authoritative role without much engagement. The involvement of scientific, journalistic or regulatory stakeholders will help create a balanced informational environment surrounding probiotic products.

Delivering eye health education to deprived communities in India through a social media-based innovation

In this article, Chandrani Maitra, with her supervisor, Prof. Jennifer Rowley, reports on her PhD research conducted at Manchester Metropolitan University. This research aimed to develop understanding of the benefits of, and the challenges associated with the use of social media to disseminate eye health information in deprived communities in India. Such communities typically have a low level of access to health information, as the result of poor literacy, poverty, lack of women's empowerment, cultural practices, society dynamics, and medical malpractice. This study used an intervention based on the social media platform, WhatsApp, to educate a group of women volunteers so that they were able to contribute to the management of the eye health of their family, friends, and neighbours. Interviews were conducted with deprived community members (DCMs), community healthcare advocates (CHAs) and, healthcare professionals (HCPs). The DCMs reported a number of benefits associated with their participation in the eye health intervention. CHAs and HCPs agreed that an extended roll out of the intervention had potential to deliver benefits, but expressed concerns that some of the ongoing social challenges facing deprived communities might act as barriers to progress. F.J.

March Mammal Madness and the power of narrative in science outreach

March Mammal Madness is a science outreach project that, over the course of several weeks in March, reaches hundreds of thousands of people in the United States every year. We combine four approaches to science outreach - gamification, social media platforms, community event(s), and creative products - to run a simulated tournament in which 64 animals compete to become the tournament champion. While the encounters between the animals are hypothetical, the outcomes rely on empirical evidence from the scientific literature. Players select their favored combatants beforehand, and during the tournament scientists translate the academic literature into gripping "play-by-play" narration on social media. To date ~1100 scholarly works, covering almost 400 taxa, have been transformed into science stories. March Mammal Madness is most typically used by high-school educators teaching life sciences, and we estimate that our materials reached ~1% of high-school students in the United States in 2019. Here we document the intentional design, public engagement, and magnitude of reach of the project. We further explain how human psychological and cognitive adaptations for shared experiences, social learning, narrative, and imagery contribute to the widespread use of March Mammal Madness.

A Social Media Campaign (#datasaveslives) to Promote the Benefits of Using Health Data for Research Purposes: Mixed Methods Analysis

BACKGROUND

Social media provides the potential to engage a wide audience about scientific research, including the public. However, little empirical research exists to guide health scientists regarding what works and how to optimize impact. We examined the social media campaign #datasaveslives established in 2014 to highlight positive examples of the use and reuse of health data in research.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to examine how the #datasaveslives hashtag was used on social media, how often, and by whom; thus, we aim to provide insights into the impact of a major social media campaign in the UK health informatics research community and further afield.

METHODS

We analyzed all publicly available posts (tweets) that included the hashtag #datasaveslives (N=13,895) on the microblogging platform Twitter between September 1, 2016, and August 31, 2017. Using a combination of qualitative and quantitative analyses, we determined the frequency and purpose of tweets. Social network analysis was used to analyze and visualize tweet sharing (retweet) networks among hashtag users.

RESULTS

Overall, we found 4175 original posts and 9720 retweets featuring #datasaveslives by 3649 unique Twitter users. In total, 66.01% (2756/4175) of the original posts were retweeted at least once. Higher frequencies of tweets were observed during the weeks of prominent policy publications, popular conferences, and public engagement events. Cluster analysis based on retweet relationships revealed an interconnected series of groups of #datasaveslives users in academia, health services and policy, and charities and patient networks. Thematic analysis of tweets showed that #datasaveslives was used for a broader range of purposes than indexing information, including event reporting, encouraging participation and action, and showing personal support for data sharing.

CONCLUSIONS

This study shows that a hashtag-based social media campaign was effective in encouraging a wide audience of stakeholders to disseminate positive examples of health research. Furthermore, the findings suggest that the campaign supported community building and bridging practices within and between the interdisciplinary sectors related to the field of health data science and encouraged individuals to demonstrate personal support for sharing health data.

Enhancing engagement beyond the conference walls: analysis of Twitter use at #ICPIC2019 infection prevention and control conference

BACKGROUND

Social media may provide a tool, when coupled with a patient-included™ conference, to enhance the engagement among the general public. We describe authors and potential readers of Twitter content surrounding a patient-included™ scientific congress, the International Consortium for Prevention and Infection Control (ICPIC) 2019.

METHODS

Retrospective observational analysis of Twitter users posting with the #ICPIC2019 hashtag during the conference. Tweet authors, overall followers, and active followers were categorized according to their Twitter biographies using unsupervised learning. Diversity of professional backgrounds of Tweet authors and their followers was explored. Network analysis explored connectedness between the reach of authors.

RESULTS

In total, 1264 participants attended ICPIC 2019, of which 28 were patients. From September 7 to 16, 2019, we were able to categorize 235'620 (41%) followers linked to 474 (76%) authors. Among authors and followers, respectively 34% and 14% were healthcare workers, 11% and 15% were from industry representatives, 8% and 7% were academic researchers. On average, 23% (range 9-39%) followers belonged to the same categories as authors. Among all followers categorized, only 582/235 620 (0.25%) interacted with original messages, including healthcare workers (37%), global and public health (12%), academic research (11%) and those from industry (11%). Though the similarity between Tweet authors and followers was supported by network analysis, we also observed that non-healthcare workers (including patients) appeared to have more diverse followers.

CONCLUSIONS

We observed the participation of numerous Tweet authors and followers from diverse professional backgrounds potentially supporting the benefit of including patients in conferences to reach a more general, non-specialized public.

Self-promotion and the need to be first in science

Scientists, like all humans, are subject to self-deceptive valuations of their importance and profile. Vainglorious practice is annoying but mostly harmless when restricted to an individual’s perception of self-worth. Language that can be associated with self-promotion and aggrandizement is destructive when incorporated into scientific writing. So too is any practice that oversells the novelty of research or fails to provide sufficient scholarship on the uniqueness of results. We evaluated whether such tendencies have been increasing over time by assessing the frequencies of articles claiming to be “the first”, and those that placed the requirement for scholarship on readers by using phrases such as “to the best of our knowledge”. Our survey of titles and abstracts of 176 journals in ecology and environmental biology revealed that the frequencies of both practices increased linearly over the past half century. We thus warn readers, journal editors, and granting agencies to use caution when assessing the claimed novelty of research contributions. A system-wide reform toward more cooperative science that values humility, and abhors hubris, might help to rectify the problem.

Expert communication on Twitter: Comparing economists' and scientists' social networks, topics and communicative styles

Experts increasingly use social media to communicate with the wider public, prompted by the need to demonstrate impact and public engagement. While previous research on the use of social media by experts focused on single topics and performed sentiment analysis, we propose to extend the scope by investigating experts' networks, topics and communicative styles. We perform social and semantic network as well language analysis of top tweeting scientists and economists. We find that economists tweet less, mention fewer people and have fewer Twitter conversations with members of the public than scientists. Scientists use a more informal and involved style and engage wider audiences through multimedia contents, while economists use more jargon, and tend to favour traditional written media. The results point to differences in experts' communicative practices online, and we propose that disciplinary ways of 'talking' may pose obstacles to an effective public communication of expert knowledge.

Where are all the anthelmintics? Challenges and opportunities on the path to new anthelmintics

Control of helminth parasites is a key challenge for human and veterinary medicine. In the absence of effective vaccines and adequate sanitation, prophylaxis and treatment commonly rely upon anthelmintics. There are concerns about the development of drug resistance, side-effects, lack of efficacy and cost-effectiveness that drive the need for new classes of anthelmintics. Despite this need, only three new drug classes have reached the animal market since 2000 and no new classes of anthelmintic have been approved for human use. So where are all the anthelmintics? What are the barriers to anthelmintic discovery, and what emerging opportunities can be used to address this? This was a discussion group focus at the 2019 8th Consortium for Anthelmintic Resistance and Susceptibility (CARS) in Wisconsin, USA. Here we report the findings of the group in the broader context of the human and veterinary anthelmintic discovery pipeline, highlighting challenges unique to antiparasitic drug discovery. We comment on why the development of novel anthelmintics has been so rare. Further, we discuss potential opportunities for drug development moving into the 21st Century.

Using interpersonal communication strategies to encourage science conversations on social media

Today, many science communicators are using social media to share scientific information with citizens, but, as research has shown, fostering conversational exchanges remains a challenge. This largely qualitative study investigated the communication strategies applied by individual scientists and environmental non-governmental organizations on Twitter and Instagram to determine whether particular social media practices encourage two-way conversations between science communicators and citizens. Data from Twitter and Instagram posts, interviews with the communicators, and a survey of audience members were triangulated to identify emergent communication strategies and the resulting engagement; provide insight into why particular practices are employed by communicators; and explain why audiences choose to participate in social media conversations with communicators. The results demonstrate that the application of interpersonal communication strategies encourage conversational engagement, in terms of the number of comments and unique individuals involved in conversations. In particular, using selfies (images and videos), non-scientific content, first person pronoun-rich captions, and responding to comments result in the formation of communicator-audience relationships, encouraging two-way conversations on social media. Furthermore, the results indicate that Instagram more readily supports the implementation of interpersonal communication strategies than Twitter, making Instagram the preferred platform for promoting conversational exchanges. These findings can be applicable to diverse communicators, subjects, audiences, and environments (online and offline) in initiatives to promote awareness and understanding of science.

Quantifying and contextualizing the impact of bioRxiv preprints through automated social media audience segmentation

Engagement with scientific manuscripts is frequently facilitated by Twitter and other social media platforms. As such, the demographics of a paper's social media audience provide a wealth of information about how scholarly research is transmitted, consumed, and interpreted by online communities. By paying attention to public perceptions of their publications, scientists can learn whether their research is stimulating positive scholarly and public thought. They can also become aware of potentially negative patterns of interest from groups that misinterpret their work in harmful ways, either willfully or unintentionally, and devise strategies for altering their messaging to mitigate these impacts. In this study, we collected 331,696 Twitter posts referencing 1,800 highly tweeted bioRxiv preprints and leveraged topic modeling to infer the characteristics of various communities engaging with each preprint on Twitter. We agnostically learned the characteristics of these audience sectors from keywords each user's followers provide in their Twitter biographies. We estimate that 96% of the preprints analyzed are dominated by academic audiences on Twitter, suggesting that social media attention does not always correspond to greater public exposure. We further demonstrate how our audience segmentation method can quantify the level of interest from nonspecialist audience sectors such as mental health advocates, dog lovers, video game developers, vegans, bitcoin investors, conspiracy theorists, journalists, religious groups, and political constituencies. Surprisingly, we also found that 10% of the preprints analyzed have sizable (>5%) audience sectors that are associated with right-wing white nationalist communities. Although none of these preprints appear to intentionally espouse any right-wing extremist messages, cases exist in which extremist appropriation comprises more than 50% of the tweets referencing a given preprint. These results present unique opportunities for improving and contextualizing the public discourse surrounding scientific research.

Five Lessons from COVID-19 for Advancing Climate Change Mitigation

The nexus of COVID-19 and climate change has so far brought attention to short-term greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions reductions, public health responses, and clean recovery stimulus packages. We take a more holistic approach, making five broad comparisons between the crises with five associated lessons for climate change mitigation policy. First, delay is costly. Second, policy design must overcome biases to human judgment. Third, inequality can be exacerbated without timely action. Fourth, global problems require multiple forms of international cooperation. Fifth, transparency of normative positions is needed to navigate value judgments at the science-policy interface. Learning from policy challenges during the COVID-19 crisis could enhance efforts to reduce GHG emissions and prepare humanity for future crises.

“People are reading your work,” scholarly identity and social networking sites

Purpose

Scholarly identity refers to endeavors by scholars to promote their reputation, work and networks using online platforms such as ResearchGate, Academia.edu and Twitter. This exploratory research investigates benefits and drawbacks of scholarly identity efforts and avenues for potential library support.

Design/methodology/approach

Data from 30 semi-structured phone interviews with faculty, doctoral students and academic librarians were qualitatively analyzed using the constant comparisons method (Charmaz, 2014) and Goffman’s (1959, 1967) theoretical concept of impression management.

Findings

Results reveal that use of online platforms enables academics to connect with others and disseminate their research. scholarly identity platforms have benefits, opportunities and offer possibilities for developing academic library support. They are also fraught with drawbacks/concerns, especially related to confusion, for-profit models and reputational risk.

Research limitations/implications

This exploratory study involves analysis of a small number of interviews (30) with self-selected social scientists from one discipline (communication) and librarians. It lacks gender, race/ethnicity and geographical diversity and focuses exclusively on individuals who use social networking sites for their scholarly identity practices.

Social implications

Results highlight benefits and risks of scholarly identity work and the potential for adopting practices that consider ethical dilemmas inherent in maintaining an online social media presence. They suggest continuing to develop library support that provides strategic guidance and information on legal responsibilities regarding copyright.

Originality/value

This research aims to understand the benefits and drawbacks of Scholarly Identity platforms and explore what support academic libraries might offer. It is among the first to investigate these topics comparing perspectives of faculty, doctoral students and librarians.

Using social media to promote academic research: Identifying the benefits of twitter for sharing academic work

To disseminate research, scholars once relied on university media services or journal press releases, but today any academic can turn to Twitter to share their published work with a broader audience. The possibility that scholars can push their research out, rather than hope that it is pulled in, holds the potential for scholars to draw wide attention to their research. In this manuscript, we examine whether there are systematic differences in the types of scholars who most benefit from this push model. Specifically, we investigate the extent to which there are gender differences in the dissemination of research via Twitter. We carry out our analyses by tracking tweet patterns for articles published in six journals across two fields (political science and communication), and we pair this Twitter data with demographic and educational data about the authors of the published articles, as well as article citation rates. We find considerable evidence that, overall, article citations are positively correlated with tweets about the article, and we find little evidence to suggest that author gender affects the transmission of research in this new media.

#SoMe4Surgery: from inception to impact

Objectives and setting

The aim of this study was to create a hashtag #SoMe4Surgery on the social network application Twitter, and to examine the natural history of the resulting online community.

Design and outcome measures

A prospective, four-stage framework was proposed and used: (1) inception phase (connection): users were actively invited to participate; (2) dissemination phase (contagion): several tweetchats were designed, scheduled and run; (3) adherence phase (feedback): Twitonomy and NodeXL summaries were regularly posted on Twitter; and (4) impact phase (outcomes): abstracts and manuscripts, and related projects on Twitter. Tweets, influencers and interactions were analysed, and a brief survey was shared with participants to assess demographics and motivations of social media use.

Participants

Users engaging with the #SoMe4Surgery hashtag.

Results

Users of the hashtag came from a wide variety of specialties and geographical locations, as well as varying in age and stage of training. The inception of #SoMe4Surgery was followed by an increase in the follower count and impressions of users. A total of 675 tweeters posted 11 855 tweets with 30 122 retweets between 28 July and 27 December inclusive. There were new contributors and activity throughout the period. There were many more retweeters than accounts posting original content. Over a 10-day period ending on 31 December 2018, the number of followers of the 10 most influential accounts was higher than the number of followers of the 10 most engaging accounts (p=0.002). The mean (SD) number of tweetchat participants was 121 (64), who posted 719 (365) tweets and had a potential reach of 3 825 155 (1 887 205) accounts. Spin-off projects included surveys from low and medium-income countries, subspecialised hashtags, presentations and one publication.

Conclusions

The creation of a cohesive online surgical community may allow a flattened hierarchy, with increased engagement between surgeons, other healthcare professionals, researchers and patients.

Altmetrics Analysis of Archivos de Bronconeumología From 2014 to 2018

INTRODUCTION

Alternative metrics or altmetrics are non-traditional measurements of scientific production that reflect a publication's influence in social networks and similar channels of dissemination. The aim of this study was to analyze the media impact of Archivos de Bronconeumología according to 2 altmetric aggregators and website visits.

METHODS

This was an observational study of the original articles and review and consensus articles published in Archivos de Bronconeumología during the period 2014-2018. Data from the PlumX Metrics and Altmetric aggregators and visits to the Archivos de Bronconeumología website were analyzed. Five comparisons were made: by specialty area, by funding received, by number of participating centers, by document type, and by topic. In a subanalysis, altmetrics were correlated with the conventional citation system.

RESULTS

We analyzed 273 papers, of which 186 were original articles (68.1%). The papers that achieved greater media impact in the 2 aggregators analyzed, and in terms of website visits, were pulmonology papers and review and consensus articles. The mean Altmetric Attention Score was 1.9±4.4 (range 0-59), which is above average for the date of publication of the paper. A statistically significant weak to moderate correlation was identified between altmetrics and conventional citations.

CONCLUSIONS

Review articles, consensus documents, and pulmonology papers had a greater media impact. Mean Altmetric Attention Score was higher than the average based on the date of publication. A weak to moderate correlation between altmetrics and conventional citations was identified.

Scientific Twitter: The flow of paleontological communication across a topic network

The field of paleontology, which is based principally on observations of the natural world, includes an active community that is engaged across multiple social media platforms, consisting of museums, academic researchers, amateur fossil collectors, paleontological artists, and commercial fossil dealers. As such, it represents an ideal environment for examining the people, interactions, and flow of scientific information. Using interactions involving the four most popular Twitter hashtags for paleontology, this embedded mixed methods study defined the members of this social world and investigated how they influenced and controlled the flow of information, as well as how their expression of scientific practice was related to their identity. Results provide further evidence for the diversity of people and practice involved in this domain of science and indicate that the magnitude and breadth of the public’s impact may be larger than previously projected. Certain types of messages were shown to be effective for different segments of the community, but news posts, essentially media outlet stories, were ineffective for generating any form of engagement. This study adds to our understanding of the important scientific contribution being made by members of the public as they interact with professional scientists and educators as peers in an open social media platform that supports a diverse and active community.

How scientists and physicians use Twitter during a medical congress

OBJECTIVES

During medical congresses Twitter allows discussions to disseminate beyond the congress hall and reach a wider audience. Insights into the dynamics of social media interactions during congresses, dissemination of scientific information and the determinants of a successful tweet may allow us to better understand social media's role in science communication.

METHODS

We retrospectively extracted social media data during the European Congress of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases (ECCMID) 2017 and 2018 using NodeXL. We compared social media activity during these two congresses. Subsequently, we conducted in-depth analyses to identify the components of a successful tweet and multivariable analysis to assess independent factors associated with retweet activity.

RESULTS

In 2018, approximately 13 000 delegates attended ECCMID, but only 591 Twitter accounts actively tweeted about the congress. Although fewer tweets were posted in 2018 compared with 2017 (4213 versus 4657, respectively), ECCMID 2018 generated a 63% increase in the total number of retweets (p < 0.001). According to multivariable logistic regression analysis, using multimedia, URL or hashtags and mentioning other Twitter account(s) were independently associated with retweet success. Mentioning of other users and use of multimedia were the only consistent predictors of retweets irrespective of the number of followers.

CONCLUSIONS

A substantial increase in retweet activity and a modest increase in the number of influential Twitter accounts were observed between two successive congresses. Dissemination of scientific messages is more successful when connected accounts are actively involved in social media activity, and social media posts constitute the right combination of components.