Comparison of Intercom and Megaphone Hashtags Using Four Years of Tweets From the Top 44 Schools of Nursing: Thematic Analysis.
Twitter
hashtag
intercom hashtag
media
megaphone hashtag
nurses
Journal
JMIR nursing
ISSN: 2562-7600
Titre abrégé: JMIR Nurs
Pays: Canada
ID NLM: 101771299
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Historique:
received:
18
10
2020
revised:
17
12
2020
accepted:
01
04
2021
entrez:
4
8
2021
pubmed:
5
8
2021
medline:
5
8
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
When this study began in 2018, I sought to determine the extent to which the top 50 schools of nursing were using hashtags that could attract attention from journalists on Twitter. In December 2020, the timeframe was expanded to encompass 2 more years of data, and an analysis was conducted of the types of hashtags used. The study attempted to answer the following question: to what extent are top-ranked schools of nursing using hashtags that could attract attention from journalists, policy makers, and the public on Twitter? In February 2018, 47 of the top 50 schools of nursing had public Twitter accounts. The most recent 3200 tweets were extracted from each account and analyzed. There were 31,762 tweets in the time period covered (September 29, 2016, through February 22, 2018). After 13,429 retweets were excluded, 18,333 tweets remained. In December 2020, 44 of the original 47 schools of nursing still had public Twitter accounts under the same name used in the first phase of the study. Three accounts that were no longer active were removed from the 2016-2018 data set, resulting in 16,939 tweets from 44 schools of nursing. The Twitter data for the 44 schools of nursing were obtained for the time period covered in the second phase of the study (February 23, 2018, through December 13, 2020), and the most recent 3200 tweets were extracted from each of the accounts. On excluding retweets, there were 40,368 tweets in the 2018-2020 data set. The 2016-2018 data set containing 16,939 tweets was merged with the 2018-2020 data set containing 40,368 tweets, resulting in 57,307 tweets in the 2016-2020 data set. Each hashtag used 100 times or more in the 2016-2020 data set was categorized as one of the following seven types: nursing, school, conference or tweet chat, health, illness/disease/condition, population, and something else. These types were then broken down into the following two categories: intercom hashtags and megaphone hashtags. Approximately 83% of the time, schools of nursing used intercom hashtags (inward-facing hashtags focused on in-group discussion within and about the profession). Schools of nursing rarely used outward-facing megaphone hashtags. There was no discernible shift in the way that schools of nursing used hashtags after the publication of Top schools of nursing use hashtags more like intercoms to communicate with other nurses rather than megaphones to invite attention from journalists, policy makers, and the public. If schools of nursing want the media to showcase their faculty members as experts, they need to increase their use of megaphone hashtags to connect the work of their faculty with topics of interest to the public.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
When this study began in 2018, I sought to determine the extent to which the top 50 schools of nursing were using hashtags that could attract attention from journalists on Twitter. In December 2020, the timeframe was expanded to encompass 2 more years of data, and an analysis was conducted of the types of hashtags used.
OBJECTIVE
OBJECTIVE
The study attempted to answer the following question: to what extent are top-ranked schools of nursing using hashtags that could attract attention from journalists, policy makers, and the public on Twitter?
METHODS
METHODS
In February 2018, 47 of the top 50 schools of nursing had public Twitter accounts. The most recent 3200 tweets were extracted from each account and analyzed. There were 31,762 tweets in the time period covered (September 29, 2016, through February 22, 2018). After 13,429 retweets were excluded, 18,333 tweets remained. In December 2020, 44 of the original 47 schools of nursing still had public Twitter accounts under the same name used in the first phase of the study. Three accounts that were no longer active were removed from the 2016-2018 data set, resulting in 16,939 tweets from 44 schools of nursing. The Twitter data for the 44 schools of nursing were obtained for the time period covered in the second phase of the study (February 23, 2018, through December 13, 2020), and the most recent 3200 tweets were extracted from each of the accounts. On excluding retweets, there were 40,368 tweets in the 2018-2020 data set. The 2016-2018 data set containing 16,939 tweets was merged with the 2018-2020 data set containing 40,368 tweets, resulting in 57,307 tweets in the 2016-2020 data set.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Each hashtag used 100 times or more in the 2016-2020 data set was categorized as one of the following seven types: nursing, school, conference or tweet chat, health, illness/disease/condition, population, and something else. These types were then broken down into the following two categories: intercom hashtags and megaphone hashtags. Approximately 83% of the time, schools of nursing used intercom hashtags (inward-facing hashtags focused on in-group discussion within and about the profession). Schools of nursing rarely used outward-facing megaphone hashtags. There was no discernible shift in the way that schools of nursing used hashtags after the publication of
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
Top schools of nursing use hashtags more like intercoms to communicate with other nurses rather than megaphones to invite attention from journalists, policy makers, and the public. If schools of nursing want the media to showcase their faculty members as experts, they need to increase their use of megaphone hashtags to connect the work of their faculty with topics of interest to the public.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34345795
doi: 10.2196/25114
pii: v4i2e25114
pmc: PMC8279434
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
e25114Commentaires et corrections
Type : ErratumIn
Informations de copyright
©Kimberly Acquaviva. Originally published in JMIR Nursing (https://nursing.jmir.org), 20.04.2021.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Conflicts of Interest: None declared.
Références
J Nurs Scholarsh. 2018 Nov;50(6):695-704
pubmed: 30260071
J Prof Nurs. 2000 Jan-Feb;16(1):31-8
pubmed: 10659517
J Nurs Manag. 2017 Nov;25(8):632-639
pubmed: 28736934
Public Health Nurs. 2017 Jul;34(4):316-323
pubmed: 28261846
J Psychosoc Nurs Ment Health Serv. 2017 Jun 1;55(6):3-4
pubmed: 28585660
J Med Internet Res. 2017 Jul 14;19(7):e252
pubmed: 28710054
JMIR Public Health Surveill. 2021 Jan 6;7(1):e24562
pubmed: 33315578
Med Teach. 2015 May;37(5):411-6
pubmed: 25523012