The Scholarly Influence of Orthopaedic Research According to Conventional and Alternative Metrics: A Systematic Review

#OrthoTwitter: Blending Information, Education, and Entertainment Online

BACKGROUND

Twitter has become a part of every medical field, including orthopaedics. #OrthoTwitter is the hashtag commonly used for orthopaedic-related tweets. Researchers have assessed the impact of Twitter in orthopaedics, but no study has evaluated the individual tweets under #OrthoTwitter. The purpose of the present study was to determine the nature of the content and interactions under #OrthoTwitter and to analyze the usefulness of #OrthoTwitter.

METHODS

After a pilot study, an analysis of #OrthoTwitter tweets was conducted from May 1, 2021, to June 30, 2021. Data were extracted in 2 stages. In Stage I, data were manually extracted at 8 p . m . IST (Indian Standard Time) on alternate days. In Stage II, data were collected using the web-scraping tool Octoparse. Data were analyzed on the basis of 3 characteristics-topic, purpose, and format of the tweet-with each characteristic comprising 10, 6, and 7 categories, respectively. An association analysis was performed using SPSS software.

RESULTS

One thousand and twenty-three tweets were analyzed. Five hundred and fifty-three (54%) of the 1,023 tweets were from orthopaedic surgeons and 123 (12%) were from orthopaedic residents. Medical students aspiring to be orthopaedic surgeons contributed 31 tweets (3%). #OrthoTwitter was also used by non-orthopaedic departments, most frequently radiology. Tweets that were educational or informative were the most common, as compared with tweets of other purposes. Two hundred and forty-six (24%) of the 1,023 tweets were educational (e.g., discussions of cases or journals) and 368 (36%) were informative (e.g., conference announcements and advertisements). Notable tweet subcategories included those related to COVID-19 (71 tweets; 7%), those of a motivational nature (41 tweets; 4%), and those containing some type of graphic content (644 tweets; 63%), for the topic, purpose, and format characteristics, respectively. We noted significantly more likes for tweets with an educational purpose (p = 0.017) and for tweets with images (p < 0.001). We also noted a significant number of retweets of educational tweets (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

#OrthoTwitter provides a unique environment in which education, news, collegial interaction, social responsibility, and entertainment thrive, making Twitter a virtual community. Tweets with an educational purpose and those that included images generated more interactions. Orthopaedic surgeons should consider using #OrthoTwitter in their orthopaedic-related tweets for a broader reach.

Keeping Up With the Literature: New Solutions for an Old Problem

Pharmacists utilize medical literature to provide evidence-based care to patients. However, staying up to date with current literature can be challenging, especially with the increasing number of publications produced in a growing number of journals. While evaluating literature is a standard in pharmacy education and training, the specific skill of keeping up with the literature is often not included. We explore the following 5 strategies to help pharmacists stay up to date with the literature: medical journals, social media, podcasts, teaching/precepting, and continuing education/board certification. Pharmacists are encouraged to evaluate which tactics fit best into their practice and incorporate them into their workflow, as well as routinely reflect on the system they create and continue to modify as needed.

Social Media Use among Orthopedic Trauma Fellowship-trained Surgeons

Objective:  To quantify the use of social media platforms by orthopedic traumatologists with an emphasis on demographic, practice-based, and regional differences. Materials and Methods:  Using the Orthopaedic Trauma Association (OTA) membership database, online searches were performed to identify professional profiles on numerous social media platforms. This presence was then quantified by a cumulative social media score which was correlated to the demographic information collected. Results:  In total, 1,262 active fellowship-trained orthopedic traumatologists were identified. Surgeons practicing in an academic setting were found to be more likely to use numerous social media platforms and to present an overall greater social media score than those in private practices. No significant differences in use were found based on practice region. Conclusion:  Social media platforms are currently underused by orthopedic traumatologists. Level of Evidence:  IV.

The relation between social media mentions and academic citations in orthodontic journals: A preliminary study

BACKGROUND

To study the relation between social media mentions and academic citations for articles published in peer-reviewed orthodontic journals.

METHODS

Articles published in early 2018 in seven peer-reviewed orthodontic journals were retrospectively analyzed in September 2022. Citation counts of the articles were evaluated using two databases: Google Scholar (GS) and Web of Science (WoS). The Altmetric Attention Score, Twitter, Facebook mentions, and Mendeley reads were tracked using the Altmetric Bookmarklet. The citation counts and social media mentions were correlated using Spearman rho.

RESULTS

A total of 84 articles were identified during the initial search; 64 (76%) were original studies and systematic review articles and included in the analysis. A total of 38% of the articles had at least one mention on social media. Over the study period, the average number of citations of the articles mentioned on social media was higher than the non-mentioned articles for GS and WoS, respectively. Moreover, significant positive correlations existed between the Altmetric Attention Score and the number of citations in GS and WoS (r_s = 0.31, P = 0.001 and r_s = 0.26, P = 0.04).

CONCLUSIONS

Social media mentions and citations of articles published in peer-reviewed orthodontic journals are correlated, with a clear difference in the number of citations in articles mentioned on social media versus those not mentioned, indicating possible increased reach of articles disseminated on social media.

Twitter Use Among Orthopedic Surgery Journals Correlates With Increased Citation Rates

Use of alternative online means of distribution for research is a rapidly evolving area in orthopedics. In this study, we investigate the impact of Twitter on research citation rates and the association between Altmetric Attention Score (AAS) and citation rates across major orthopedic journals. Original research articles published in a selection of 10 journals between January 2018 and December 2018 were analyzed for number and source of tweets, AAS, and number of citations. We determined the relationship between Twitter use of different sources and number of citations across all journals and within each individual journal, any statistical differences in citations and AAS for tweeted vs nontweeted articles, and the correlation between journal impact factor and average number of monthly tweets. We included 2916 articles in our study, at an average of 26 months after publication. The mean AAS was 9.7 (SD, 45.1; range, 0-1125), and mean citation rate was 6.4 (SD, 8.5; range, 0-166). Impact factor was strongly correlated with average monthly tweets (r²=0.77). Tweeted articles received 8.51 citations on average, compared with 2.56 citations for nontweeted articles (P<.05). Tweets sent by the author/department had the highest impact on future citations (P<.01). Tweets by news outlets had a smaller, positive effect on citations (P<.01). Tweets sent by Arthroscopy (P<.01) and Journal of Pediatric Orthopaedics (P<.01) had high impacts compared with other journals. [Orthopedics. 2023;46(1):e38-e44.].

#OrthoTwitter: Relationship Between Author Twitter Utilization and Academic Impact in Orthopaedic Surgery

Background #OrthoTwitter has evolved to disseminate findings and engage the public. However, the academic impact of Twitter utilization in orthopaedic surgery is unknown. Questions/purposes The purpose of the study was to evaluate relationships between the author and manuscript Twitter activity and citations. Methods Manuscripts in 17 orthopaedic journals from 2018 were identified. Citations, online mentions, impact factors, and subspecialties were obtained. H-index and Twitter account details for authors were obtained for a subset of manuscripts. Relationships between Twitter activity and citations were evaluated. Results 2,473/4,224 (58.5%) manuscripts were mentioned on Twitter (n=29,958 mentions), with Twitter manuscripts cited more frequently (median 10 vs. 7, p<0.0001). Twitter mentions, impact factors, non-open-access status, and subspecialties were associated with citation counts. Articles mentioned in 10, 100, and 1,000 Tweets were observed to have a 1.1-fold, 1.7-fold, and 245-fold increase in citations. In author-level analyses, 156 (20.0%) first and 216 (27.7%) senior authors had Twitter accounts. Citation count was associated with increasing senior author H-index (β _est=0.13, p<0.05), Twitter mentions (β _est=0.0043, p<0.0001), impact factors (β _est=0.13, p<0.0001), and having a first (β _est=0.20, p<0.05) or senior author (β _est=0.17, p<0.05) on Twitter. Articles published in arthroplasty (β _est=0.49, p<0.05), general interest (β _est=0.55, p<0.01), sports (β _est=0.63, p<0.01), and non-open access journals (β _est=0.41, p<0.001) were cited more. H-index correlated with followers for first (rho=0.31, p<0.0001) and senior authors (rho=0.44, p<0.0001). Conclusion Author Twitter utilization is independently associated with manuscript citations. Authors should be aware of the potential association between social media utilization and traditional academic impact. Understanding the relationship between social media utilization and academic impact is necessary to effectively disseminate research.

Analysis of the Most Frequently Cited Articles in Hand and Wrist Surgery: A Modern Reading List

The aim of this investigation was to analyze the 50 most frequently cited articles on hand and wrist surgery of all time and those published during the 21^st century. We aimed to evaluate the article, author, and journal characteristics for these publications in order to create a modern reading list of impactful upper-extremity articles. A search of the Journal Citation Reports 2022 edition to identify journals containing possible hand or wrist-related articles was performed. Related journals were identified and then searched on the Web of Science database to identify hand and wrist articles. The top 50 most cited articles overall and the top 50 most cited articles from 2000-2021 were identified and indexed. Several bibliometric parameters, such as study type, study topic, study design, level of evidence, citation count, citation density, the institution of the lead author, the gender of lead and senior authors, and country were analyzed. For the most cited articles of all time, the number of citations ranged from 224 to 1109 with a mean of 368 citations and 15.0 citation density. Citations for the top 50 articles from 2000-2021 ranged from 153 to 950 with a mean of 233 citations and 14.5 citation density. For both groups, the most common level of evidence was level IV (33% and 27%). No correlation between journal impact factor and citation count or citation density was found. In both groups, "fracture" was the most common topic and papers were predominantly written by male authors. Frequently cited publications on hand and wrist surgery are often clinical papers that contain low levels of evidence and tend to focus on topics related to fracture care. Female authors remain underrepresented.

A Multimodal Pain Management Regimen for Open Treatment of Distal Radius Fractures: A Randomized Blinded Study

BACKGROUND

Adequate pain control is critical after outpatient surgery where patients are not as closely monitored. A multimodal pain management regimen was compared to a conventional pain management method in patients undergoing operative fixation for distal radius fractures. We hypothesized that there would be a decrease in the amount of narcotics used by the multimodal group compared to the conventional pain management group, and that there would be no difference in bone healing postoperatively.

METHODS

Forty-two patients were randomized into 2 groups based on pain protocols. Group 1, the control, received a regional block, acetaminophen, and oxycodone. Group 2 received a multimodal pain regimen consisting of daily doses of pregabalin, celecoxib, and acetaminophen up until postoperative day (POD) #3. They also received a regional block with oxycodone for breakthrough pain.

RESULTS

From POD#3 to week 1, there was a significant increase in oxycodone use in the study group correlating with the point in time when the multimodal regimen was discontinued. The shortened Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand Questionnaire (QuickDASH) scores taken at 2 weeks postoperation showed a significantly lower average score in the study group compared to the control. There was no difference in bone healing.

CONCLUSIONS

The 2 regimens yielded similar pain control after surgery. The rebound increase in narcotic use after the multimodal regimen was discontinued, and significant difference in QuickDASH scores seen at 2 weeks postoperatively supported that multimodal regimens may not necessarily lead to decreased narcotic use in outpatient upper extremity surgery, but in the short term are shown to improve functional status.

How Does Open Access Publication Impact Readership and Citation Rates of Lumbar Spine Literature?

STUDY DESIGN

This was a retrospective review.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to assess the impact of open access (OA) publication on citation rates and attention scores of literature related to lumbar spine surgery.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

OA literature allows readers to view full-text manuscripts of research publications free of charge, however, OA publication is often associated with substantial fees for authors.

METHODS

The Altmetric database was searched for articles related to lumbar spine surgery. Title, journal, publication date, Dimensions Citations, Mendeley Readers, Altmetric Attention Score (AAS), number of public mentions, and OA status were collected for each included article. The influence of OA status on Dimensions Citations, Mendeley Readers, and each individual component of the AAS was assessed. To control for journal influence, impact of OA on Dimensions Citations and AAS was separately assessed for each of the top 10 journals contributing the most mentioned articles. The top 25 most cited articles and top 25 articles by AAS were also characterized.

RESULTS

A total of 5245 articles were included, of which 2063 were published with OA and 3182 were not. OA status was a significant, independent predictor of AAS and Mendeley Readers (both P <0.001), but not Dimensions Citations ( P =0.422). OA status significantly predicted mentions in news stories ( P =0.003), Twitter posts ( P <0.001), Facebook posts ( P <0.001), and Wikipedia citations ( P =0.011). Of the top 10 contributing journals, OA status significantly predicted Dimensions Citations for European Spine Journal , Journal of Neurosurgery: Spine , and Neurosurgery ( P ≤0.005) and predicted AAS for Spine , European Spine Journal , The Spine Journal , Journal of Neurosurgery: Spine , and Neurosurgery ( P ≤0.017, all).

DISCUSSION

OA status appeared to significantly impact public attention scores, but not citation rates, although these effects did vary based on the journal in which articles were published. Authors may want to consider OA publication based on their target audience and the goal of their research.

Digital Strategy and Social Media for Infectious Diseases

This supplement demonstrates the profound reach of social media across several domains: improved clinical care and advocacy, data analysis, broad reach to diverse patient populations, educational access, best practices in medical education, peer review, digital strategy for individuals and institutions, and combating misinformation.

Twitter Mentions Influence Academic Citation Count of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery Publications

Background

Social media use among scholars and journals is growing and has augmented the academic impact of published articles in several areas of medicine. However, the influence of social media postings on academic citations of shoulder and elbow surgery publications is not known. In this study, we sought (1) to quantify the adoption of Twitter use for the dissemination of research publications by three prominent shoulder and elbow surgery journals and (2) to determine the correlation between Twitter mentions and academic citations in shoulder and elbow surgery publications.

Methodology

A total of 396 original research articles from three shoulder and elbow surgery journals (Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery (JSES), Shoulder & Elbow, and JSES International) published in 2018 were assessed 34 to 45 months after print publication. For each article, the total number of Twitter mentions were obtained using Altmetric Bookmarklet and grouped into those tweeted by authors, an official outlet, or a third party. Article citation data was obtained using the Google Scholar search engine. Pearson correlation was used to determine the association between the number of Twitter mentions and citation count.

Results

Of all articles, 51% (202/396) had at least one Twitter mention. Of all Twitter mentions, 12.7% (367/2,879) occurred within the first week of online publication dates, while 51.5% (1,482/2,879) occurred between online and print publication dates. Articles mentioned on Twitter had 1.3-fold more Google Scholar citations (17.7 ± 15.2) than articles with no Twitter mentions (14.0 ± 15.7) (p = 0.017). The number of Twitter mentions had a weakly positive correlation with academic citation count (r = 0.25; p < 0.001). No significant difference in academic citation rates was found between articles tweeted by authors or official outlets when compared to articles tweeted by a third party only (p = 0.97 and p = 0.34, respectively).

Conclusions

Approximately half of shoulder and elbow surgery publications are shared on Twitter, with the majority of the activity occurring prior to their print publication date. The finding that tweeted articles have more academic citations within three years of release suggests that social media activity seems to amplify the academic impact of shoulder and elbow surgery publications.

The 50 most impactful articles on the medial ulnar collateral ligament: An altmetric analysis of online media

The purpose of this study was to use the Altmetric Attention Score to determine the 50 most impactful medial ulnar collateral ligament articles in online media and compare their characteristics to the most-cited medial ulnar collateral ligament articles in the scientific literature. The Altmetric database was queried to identify all published articles about the medial ulnar collateral ligament, and this list was stratified by the Altmetric Attention Score to identify the 50 highest scoring articles. Several data elements were extracted, including article topic, article type, journal name, and the number of online mentions on Facebook, Twitter, news, and other platforms. Each article’s geographic origin was determined based on the institutional affiliation of the first author. Our index search yielded 1283 articles published between 1987 and 2020, from which the 50 articles with the highest Altmetric Attention Scores were included for analysis. Altmetric Attention Scores of the top 50 medial ulnar collateral ligament articles ranged from 20 to 482 (median: 32, interquartile range: 20–62). The most common article type was original research (72%), and the most common topic was epidemiology/risk factors (26%). A majority of studies were Level 3 (36%) or Level 4 evidence (36%). Of the top 50 medial ulnar collateral ligament articles, 94% originated from the United States. A few articles had a high Altmetric Attention Score, suggesting that medial ulnar collateral ligament research does not generate consistently high online attention. The lack of Level 1 studies suggests the need for high-level studies on the medial ulnar collateral ligament. Most studies originated in the United States and were published in the American Orthopaedic Society for Sports Medicine–affiliated journals. The medial ulnar collateral ligament articles included in this study differed substantially from a previous report of the most-cited medial ulnar collateral ligament articles in the literature, suggesting that alternative metrics add a unique dimension to understanding the overall impact of published research on the medial ulnar collateral ligament.

Subspecialty Variation in Academic Citations of Orthopedic Surgery Publications

Background

The objective of this study was to assess the variation in academic citation and social media mentions across orthopedic subspecialties in general orthopedic surgery journals.

Methods

An internet-based study was performed of 666 articles from four orthopedic journals published from January 2018 to February 2019. Each publication was categorized by its subspecialty within orthopedics: arthroplasty, hand and upper extremity, foot and ankle, orthopedic oncology, pediatric orthopedics, shoulder, spine, sports medicine, orthopedic trauma, basic science, and miscellaneous. For each publication, academic citations were quantified using Google Scholar and Web of Science, and social media mentions were quantified using Twitter. Comparisons of continuous data among various subspecialties were performed using analysis of variance.

Results

The average number of citations per publication was 7.4 ± 9.0 on Google Scholar, 4.5 ± 5.3 on Web of Science, and 2.8 ± 8.7 on Twitter. The number of academic citations differed significantly by subspecialty on Google Scholar (p < 0.001) and Web of Science (p < 0.001). There was no difference in social media mentions on Twitter by subspecialty (p = 0.8). The most highly cited subspecialties, adjusted for number of publications, were arthroplasty, orthopedic oncology, and sports medicine, while the least highly cited subspecialties were hand and upper extremity, pediatric orthopedics, and orthopedic basic science.

Conclusions

There is significant baseline variation in the citation of orthopedic publications among various subspecialties. Our findings argue against the use of a uniform threshold to gauge scholarly success in orthopedic surgery. The variation in citation of orthopedic publications across subspecialties support the use of subspecialty-specific benchmarks to gauge academic productivity.

Correlation Between Social Media Postings and Academic Citations of Hand Surgery Research Publications

PURPOSE

The relationship between social media postings and academic citations of hand surgery research publications is not known. The objectives of this study were (1) to quantify adoption of social media for the dissemination of original research publications by 3 hand surgery journals, and (2) to determine the correlation between social media postings and academic citations in recent hand surgery research publications.

METHODS

An Internet-based study was performed of all research articles from 3 hand surgery journals published from January 2018 to March 2019. A final sample of 472 original full-length scientific research articles was included. For each article, the total number of social media postings was determined using Twitter, as well as the number of tweets, number of retweets, number of tweets from an official outlet, and number of tweets from an author. The number of academic citations for each article was determined using Google Scholar.

RESULTS

Average number of academic citations per article was 3.9. Average number of social media posts per article was 3.2, which consisted of an average of 1.3 tweets and 1.9 retweets per article. The number of academic citations per article was weakly correlated with the number of social medial postings, the number of tweets, and the number of retweets. The number of tweets from an official outlet and from an author were weakly correlated with academic citation.

CONCLUSIONS

In the early adoption of social media for the dissemination of hand surgery research, there is a weak correlation between social media posting of hand surgery research and academic citation.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Future studies are needed to assess whether social media posting of hand surgery research results in academic citations at the longer time intervals necessary for research publication maturity.

Impact of Conventional and Open Access Publications in Orthopaedic Surgery

INTRODUCTION

The academic impact of open access publications compared with conventional publications in orthopaedic surgery is not well described. The primary objective of this study was to compare the number of academic citations and social media posts between recent conventional and open access publications in orthopaedic surgery. Secondary objectives of this study were (1) to determine the correlation between academic citations and social media posts and (2) to study the trend of academic citations and social media posts over time.

METHODS

An internet-based study was performed on 3,720 articles from five high-impact orthopaedic journals and their associated open access journals from March 2017 to February 2019, including 2,929 conventional and 791 open access journal publications. Academic citations were quantified using Google Scholar and Web of Science, and social media mentions using Twitter. The Mann-Whitney U test was used for comparisons of nonparametric data, and the Spearman rank correlation coefficient was calculated for correlations.

RESULTS

The average number of academic citations per article was 10.1 on Google Scholar and 6.0 on Web of Science. The average number of Twitter posts per article was 1.6. Conventional publications had markedly more citations than open access publications on Google Scholar and Web of Science. Open access publications had markedly more Twitter posts, but the effect size was small and unimportant. Academic citations were weakly correlated with social media posts. On average, orthopaedic publications accrue 7.4 citations per year on Google Scholar and 4.6 citations per year on Web of Science.

DISCUSSION

Our findings support a citation advantage to conventional publication. Publications in open access journals are cited less frequently and less rapidly compared with those in conventional journals. The use of social media for orthopaedic research is effectively equivalent between conventional and open access journals and continues to grow.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

N/A.

Social media as a tool for engaging medical students interested in orthopaedic surgery

Objective

Instagram and Twitter are two of the most popular social media platforms today. Beyond social communication, these platforms also have the potential to enhance medical education by providing early exposure and mentorship to students and residents in training. The purpose of this study was 1) to investigate orthopaedic surgery related content posted on Instagram and Twitter 2) to analyze who posts orthopaedic surgery related content and 3) to better understand how social media may be used to supplement medical education and exposure for students interested in orthopaedics.

Design

Three hashtags, #Orthopedics, #OrthopedicSurgery, and #OrthopedicSurgeon were searched on Instagram and Twitter from March 8 to March 18, 2020. Posts on both platforms were analyzed for the hashtag used, number of likes, source type (e.g. physician, company promoting a product), and type of post (e.g. advertisement, educational). Descriptive statistics were used to analyze the results.

Setting

This study was performed at the Tulane University School of Medicine, New Orleans, LA, by medical students, with guidance and supervision from faculty in the Tulane University Department of Orthopaedics.

Results

Data was collected from 212 (47.2%) Instagram and 237 (52.8%) Twitter posts over a 10-day period. Significantly more Instagram posts used the hashtags #Orthopedicsurgeon and #Orthopedicsurgery (P<.001), while more Twitter posts used the hashtag #Orthopedics (72.0% P<.001). Companies using these hashtags posted more frequently on Twitter than Instagram (P<.001), while a higher number of physicians, orthopaedic practices, and personal accounts utilized Instagram (P<.001). There was significantly more advertising content on Twitter (P<.001), while Instagram included more personal anecdotes, medical imaging and procedures (P<.001).

Conclusion

This study demonstrated that content related to orthopaedic surgery is regularly posted on both Instagram and Twitter. Instagram is a visually driven platform that more frequently posted educational and personal content from medical professionals and individuals, while Twitter predominantly published advertisements from companies and orthopaedic practices. The current use of Instagram may make it better suited for providing information and early exposure to medical students interested in the field.

Levels of Evidence

III.

If I tweet will you cite later? Follow-up on the effect of social media exposure on article downloads and citations

OBJECTIVES

We previously reported that random assignment of scientific articles to a social media exposure intervention did not have an effect on article downloads and citations. In this paper, we investigate whether longer observation time after exposure to a social media intervention has altered the previously reported results.

METHODS

For articles published in the International Journal of Public Health between December 2012 and December 2014, we updated article download and citation data for a minimum of 24-month follow-up. We re-analysed the effect of social media exposure on article downloads and citations.

RESULTS

There was no difference between intervention and control group in terms of downloads (p = 0.72) and citations (p= 0.30) for all papers and when we stratified by open access status.

CONCLUSIONS

Longer observation time did not increase the relative differences in the numbers of downloads and citations between papers in the social media intervention group and papers in the control group. Traditional impact metrics based on citations, such as impact factor, may not capture the added value of social media for scientific publications.

Correlation Between Social Media Posts and Academic Citations of Orthopaedic Research

The objectives of this study were to quantify adoption of social media for the dissemination of original research in orthopaedic research and to determine the correlation between academic citations and social medial posts among recent orthopaedic publications.

The Use of Social Media to Increase the Impact of Health Research: Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Academics in all disciplines increasingly use social media to share their publications on the internet, reaching out to different audiences. In the last few years, specific indicators of social media impact have been developed (eg, Altmetrics), to complement traditional bibliometric indicators (eg, citation count and h-index). In health research, it is unclear whether social media impact also translates into research impact.

OBJECTIVE

The primary aim of this study was to systematically review the literature on the impact of using social media on the dissemination of health research. The secondary aim was to assess the correlation between Altmetrics and traditional citation-based metrics.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review to identify studies that evaluated the use of social media to disseminate research published in health-related journals. We specifically looked at studies that described experimental or correlational studies linking the use of social media with outcomes related to bibliometrics. We searched the Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online (MEDLINE), Excerpta Medica dataBASE (EMBASE), and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) databases using a predefined search strategy (International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews: CRD42017057709). We conducted independent and duplicate study selection and data extraction. Given the heterogeneity of the included studies, we summarized the findings through a narrative synthesis.

RESULTS

Of a total of 18,624 retrieved citations, we included 51 studies: 7 (14%) impact studies (answering the primary aim) and 44 (86%) correlational studies (answering the secondary aim). Impact studies reported mixed results with several limitations, including the use of interventions of inappropriately low intensity and short duration. The majority of correlational studies suggested a positive association between traditional bibliometrics and social media metrics (eg, number of mentions) in health research.

CONCLUSIONS

We have identified suggestive yet inconclusive evidence on the impact of using social media to increase the number of citations in health research. Further studies with better design are needed to assess the causal link between social media impact and bibliometrics.

Social media for the regional anesthesiologist: can we use it in place of medical journals?

The regional anesthesia community regularly uses social media for advocacy and education. Well-known leaders in the field are willing to share their opinions with colleagues in a public forum. Some visionaries predict that the influence of social media will soon transcend that of the traditional academic journal. While physicians support the use of social media, an trend may exist toward anecdotal information. Does a lack of online regulation along with a bias towards self-promotion cloud meaningful discussion? In order to avoid the pitfalls of social media, thoughtful communication will help regional anesthesiologists promote their subspecialty. Mindful dialog, promotion of academic journals, and professional etiquette will help maintain a collegial environment.

Who should you be following? The top 100 social media influencers in orthopaedic surgery

BACKGROUND

Social media has been credited with the potential to transform medicine, and Twitter was recently named “an essential tool” for the academic surgeon. Despite this, peer-to-peer and educational influence on social media has not been studied within orthopaedic surgery. This knowledge is important to identify who is controlling the conversation about orthopaedics to the public. We hypothesized that the plurality of top influencers would be sports medicine surgeons, that social media influence would not be disconnected from academic productivity, and that some of the top social media influencers in orthopaedic surgery would not be orthopaedic surgeons.

AIM

To identify the top 100 social media influencers within orthopaedics, characterize who they are, and relate their social media influence to academic influence.

METHODS

Twitter influence scores for the topic “orthopaedics” were collected in July 2018 using Right Relevance software. The accounts with the top influence scores were linked to individual names, and the account owners were characterized with respect to specialty, subspecialty, practice setting, location, board certification, and academic Hirsch index (h-index).

RESULTS

Seventy-eight percent of top influencers were orthopaedic surgeons. The most common locations included California (13%), Florida (8%), New York (7%), United Kingdom (7%), Colorado (6%), and Minnesota (6%). The mean academic h-index of the top influencers (n = 79) was 13.67 ± 4.12 (mean ± 95%CI) and median 7 (range 1-89) (median reported h-index of academic orthopaedic faculty is 5 and orthopaedic chairpersons is 13). Of the 78 orthopaedic surgeons, the most common subspecialties were sports medicine (54%), hand and upper extremity (18%), and spine (8%). Most influencers worked in private practice (53%), followed by academics (17%), privademics (14%), and hospital-based (9%). All eligible orthopaedic surgeons with publicly-verifiable board certification statuses were board-certified (n = 74).

CONCLUSION

The top orthopaedic social media influencers on Twitter were predominantly board-certified, sports-medicine subspecialists working in private practice in the United States. Social media influence was highly concordant with academic productivity as measured by the academic h-index. Though the majority of influencers are orthopaedic surgeons, 22% of top influencers on Twitter are not, which is important to identify given the potential for these individuals to influence patients’ perceptions and expectations. This study also provides the top influencer network for other orthopaedic surgeons to engage with on social media to improve their own social media influence.

Using social media to disseminate research in infection prevention, hospital epidemiology, and antimicrobial stewardship

Social media, prevention of healthcare-associated infections (HAIs) and antimicrobial stewardship (ASP) each impact every area of medicine. Independently, each have power to change medicine, however, synergistically, the impact could be transformative. Given the profound clinical, financial, and public health impact of infection prevention and antimicrobial stewardship combined with the incomplete uptake of best practices, multimodal strategies employing social media are critical to increase the speed and reach of research. This review discusses the strategic utilization of online communication platforms to increase the dissemination of critical publications.

Assessment of Korea's Orthopedic Research Activities in the Top 15 Orthopedic Journals, 2008-2017

Background

Bibliometrics is increasingly used to assess the quantity and quality of scientific research output in many research fields worldwide. This study aims to update Korea's worldwide research productivity in the field of orthopedics using bibliometric methods and to provide Korean surgeons and researchers with insights into such research.

Methods

Articles published in the top 15 orthopedic journals between 2008 and 2017 were retrieved using the Web of Science. The number of articles, citations and h-index (Hirsch index), funding sources, institutions, and journal patterns were analyzed.

Results

Of the total 39,494 articles, Korea's contribution accounted for 5.6% (2,161 articles), ranking fifth in the world in the number of publications. Korea ranked sixth (with 29,456) for total citations worldwide but ranked 17th (13.64) in terms of average citation per item and 14th (55) in terms of h-index. Korea showed the most prolific productivity in the field of sports medicine and arthroscopy. The institution that produced the highest number of publications was Seoul National University (n = 386, 17.9%).

Conclusions

Orthopedic research in South Korea demonstrated high productivity in terms of the number of publications in high-quality journals between 2008 and 2017. However, total citations and average citations per article were still relatively low. Efforts should be made to increase citation rates for further improvement in research productivity in the field of orthopedics.

Knowledge Dissemination of Intimate Partner Violence Intervention Studies Measured Using Alternative Metrics: Results From a Scoping Review

Alternative metrics measure the number of online mentions that an academic paper receives, including mentions in social media and online news outlets. It is important to monitor and measure dispersion of intimate partner violence (IPV) victim intervention research so that we can improve our knowledge translation and exchange (KTE) processes improving utilization of study findings. The objective of this study is to describe the dissemination of published IPV victim intervention studies and to explore which study characteristics are associated with a greater number of alternative metric mentions and conventional citations. As part of a larger scoping review, we conducted a literature search to identify IPV intervention studies. Outcomes included znumber of alternative metric mentions and conventional citations. Fifty-nine studies were included in this study. The median number of alternative metric mentions was six, and the median number of conventional citations was two. Forty-one percent of the studies (24/59) had no alternative metric mentions, and 27% (16/59) had no conventional citations. Longer time since publication was significantly associated with a greater number of mentions and citations, as were systematic reviews and randomized controlled trial designs. The majority of IPV studies receive little to no online attention or citations in academic journals, indicating a need for the field to focus on implementing strong knowledge dissemination plans. The papers receiving the most alternative metric mentions and conventional citations were also the more rigorous study designs, indicating a need to focus on study quality. We recommend using alternative metrics in conjunction with conventional metrics to evaluate the full dissemination of IPV research.

Use of a Coordinated Social Media Strategy to Improve Dissemination of Research and Collect Solutions Related to Workforce Gender Equity

Background: To increase awareness, search for solutions, and drive change, disparity-related research needs to be strategically disseminated. This study aimed to quantify whether a social media strategy could: (1) amplify dissemination of gender equity-related articles and (2) collect proposed solutions to gender equity issues. Methods: In April 2018, eight published journal articles covering separate gender equity issues were presented in a 1-hour Twitter chat hosted by Physician's Weekly. Metrics data were collected before, during, and after the chat. During the chat, one question related to each article was tweeted at a time. Qualitative data were extracted from responses and evaluated for thematic content. Results: In the 16-hour period during and following the chat, we tallied 1500 tweets from 294 participants and 8.6 million impressions (potential views). The Altmetric Attention Score of each article increased (average, 126.5 points; range, 91-208 points). Within the respective journal, the Altmetric Rank of seven articles improved (range, 3 to ≥19), while the eighth maintained its #1 rank. The one article for which share and download data were available experienced a 729% increase in shares following prechat posts and another 113% bump after the chat, a 1667% increase overall (n = 45-795). Similarly, downloads, and presumably reads, increased 712% following prechat posts and another 47% bump after the chat, a 1093% increase overall (n = 394-4700). We tallied 181 potential solutions to the eight gender equity-related questions. Conclusion: Our results demonstrate that social media can be used strategically to increase the dissemination of research articles and collect solution-focused feedback.

Benefits and Threats to Using Social Media for Presenting and Implementing Evidence

As a potential high-yield tool for disseminating information that can reach many people, social media is transforming how clinicians, the public, and policy makers are educated and find new knowledge associated with research-related information. Social media is available to all who access the internet, reducing selected barriers to acquiring original source documents such as journal articles or books and potentially improving implementation-the process of formulating a conclusion and moving on that decision. The use of social media for evidence dissemination/implementation of research has both benefits and threats. It is the aim of this Viewpoint to provide a balanced view of each. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2018;48(1):3-7. doi:10.2519/jospt.2018.0601.