Twitter: A Platform for Dissemination and Discussion of Scientific Papers in Radiation Oncology.
Journal
American journal of clinical oncology
ISSN: 1537-453X
Titre abrégé: Am J Clin Oncol
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 8207754
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
06 2020
06 2020
Historique:
pubmed:
14
3
2020
medline:
7
8
2020
entrez:
14
3
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
The objective of this study was to examine the correlation between Twitter mentions and the number of academic citations of radiation oncology articles. We reviewed all 178 clinical manuscripts of the 2 most important radiation oncology journals and "Brachytherapy," and all clinical manuscripts relating to radiation oncology from the top 10 impact factor oncology journals, published between January and February 2018. We collected the record of citations utilizing Scopus and Google Scholar platforms and the number of times an article was tweeted about using the "Altmetric Bookmarklet." χ test was used to compare distributions between groups and the Pearson coefficient was used for correlations between the Twitter metrics and academic citations. Overall, 71% of all articles were tweeted about at least once. There was a significant correlation between the number of tweets and the number of citations in Google Scholar (r=0.55, P<0.001) and in Scopus (r=0.59, P<0.001). The 11% of articles with a prepublication Twitter "buzz" (defined as an article with ≥10 tweets before publication) had 3.6 times more citations in Scopus (mean: 14.8 vs. 4.2, P<0.001) and 2.9 times more citations in Google Scholar (17.8 vs. 6.0, P<0.001) when compared with papers with no "buzz." Presence on Twitter was correlated with the number of academic citations of an article in radiation oncology. This suggests that Twitter is being utilized by the oncology community as a platform to discuss and disseminate high impact scientific articles. The correlation between Twitter and increasing the number of citations of an article through larger dissemination and exposure requires further studies.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32167936
doi: 10.1097/COC.0000000000000685
pii: 00000421-202006000-00010
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
442-445Références
Eysenbach G. Can tweets predict citations? Metrics of social impact based on twitter and correlation with traditional metrics of scientific impact. J Med Internet Res. 2011;13:e123.
Rosenkrantz AB, Ayoola A, Singh K, et al. Alternative metrics (“Altmetrics”) for assessing article impact in popular general radiology journals. Acad Radiol. 2017;24:891–897.
Utengen A. New healthcare analytics features for social media; 2012.
Hanna TP, Shafiq J, Delaney GP, et al. The population benefit of evidence-based radiotherapy: 5-year local control and overall survival benefits. Radiother Oncol. 2018;126:191–197.
Pathmanathan AU, van As NJ, Kerkmeijer LGW, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging-guided adaptive radiation therapy: a “game changer” for prostate treatment? Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2018;100:361–373.
Iyengar P, Wardak Z, Gerber DE, et al. Consolidative radiotherapy for limited metastatic non–small-cell lung cancer: a phase 2 randomized clinical trial. JAMA Oncol. 2018;4:e173501.
Hayon S, Tripathi H, Stormont IM, et al. Twitter mentions and academic citations in the urologic literature. Urology. 2019;123:28–33.
Ciprut S, Curnyn C, Davuluri M, et al. Twitter activity associated with U.S. news and world report reputation scores for urology departments. Urology. 2017;108:11–16.
Shultz M. Comparing test searches in PubMed and Google Scholar. J Med Libr Assoc. 2007;95:442–445.