The Association Between Professional Accounts on Social Networks Twitter and ResearchGate and the Number of Scientific Publications and Citations Among Anesthesia Researchers: Observational Study.
ResearchGate
Twitter
academic
anesthesia
bibliometrics
citation
publication
research output
researcher
social media
social network
Journal
Journal of medical Internet research
ISSN: 1438-8871
Titre abrégé: J Med Internet Res
Pays: Canada
ID NLM: 100959882
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
15 10 2021
15 10 2021
Historique:
received:
21
04
2021
accepted:
12
08
2021
revised:
22
07
2021
entrez:
15
10
2021
pubmed:
16
10
2021
medline:
29
10
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Social networks are now essential tools for promoting research and researchers. However, there is no study investigating the link between presence or not on professional social networks and scientific publication or citation for a given researcher. The objective of this study was to study the link between professional presence on social networks and scientific publications/citations among anesthesia researchers. We included all the French full professors and associate professors of anesthesia. We analyzed their presence on the social networks Twitter (professional account with ≥1 tweet over the 6 previous months) and ResearchGate. We extracted their bibliometric parameters for the 2016-2020 period via the Web of Science Core Collection (Clarivate Analytics) database in the Science Citation Index-Expanded index. A total of 162 researchers were analyzed; 42 (25.9%) had an active Twitter account and 110 (67.9%) a ResearchGate account. There was no difference between associate professors and full professors regarding active presence on Twitter (8/23 [35%] vs. 34/139 [24.5%], respectively; P=.31) or ResearchGate (15/23 [65%] vs. 95/139 [68.3%], respectively; P=.81). Researchers with an active Twitter account (median [IQR]) had more scientific publications (45 [28-61] vs. 26 [12-41]; P<.001), a higher h-index (12 [8-16] vs. 8 [5-11]; P<.001), a higher number of citations per publication (12.54 [9.65-21.8] vs. 10.63 [5.67-16.10]; P=.01), and a higher number of citations (563 [321-896] vs. 263 [105-484]; P<.001). Researchers with a ResearchGate account (median [IQR]) had more scientific publications (33 [17-47] vs. 26 [9-43]; P=.03) and a higher h-index (9 [6-13] vs. 8 [3-11]; P=.03). There was no difference between researchers with a ResearchGate account and those without it concerning the number of citations per publication and overall number of citations. In multivariate analysis including sex, academic status, and presence on social networks, the presence on Twitter was associated with the number of publications (β=20.2; P<.001), the number of citations (β=494.5; P<.001), and the h-index (β=4.5; P<.001). Among French anesthesia researchers, an active presence on Twitter is associated with higher scientific publication and citations.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Social networks are now essential tools for promoting research and researchers. However, there is no study investigating the link between presence or not on professional social networks and scientific publication or citation for a given researcher.
OBJECTIVE
The objective of this study was to study the link between professional presence on social networks and scientific publications/citations among anesthesia researchers.
METHODS
We included all the French full professors and associate professors of anesthesia. We analyzed their presence on the social networks Twitter (professional account with ≥1 tweet over the 6 previous months) and ResearchGate. We extracted their bibliometric parameters for the 2016-2020 period via the Web of Science Core Collection (Clarivate Analytics) database in the Science Citation Index-Expanded index.
RESULTS
A total of 162 researchers were analyzed; 42 (25.9%) had an active Twitter account and 110 (67.9%) a ResearchGate account. There was no difference between associate professors and full professors regarding active presence on Twitter (8/23 [35%] vs. 34/139 [24.5%], respectively; P=.31) or ResearchGate (15/23 [65%] vs. 95/139 [68.3%], respectively; P=.81). Researchers with an active Twitter account (median [IQR]) had more scientific publications (45 [28-61] vs. 26 [12-41]; P<.001), a higher h-index (12 [8-16] vs. 8 [5-11]; P<.001), a higher number of citations per publication (12.54 [9.65-21.8] vs. 10.63 [5.67-16.10]; P=.01), and a higher number of citations (563 [321-896] vs. 263 [105-484]; P<.001). Researchers with a ResearchGate account (median [IQR]) had more scientific publications (33 [17-47] vs. 26 [9-43]; P=.03) and a higher h-index (9 [6-13] vs. 8 [3-11]; P=.03). There was no difference between researchers with a ResearchGate account and those without it concerning the number of citations per publication and overall number of citations. In multivariate analysis including sex, academic status, and presence on social networks, the presence on Twitter was associated with the number of publications (β=20.2; P<.001), the number of citations (β=494.5; P<.001), and the h-index (β=4.5; P<.001).
CONCLUSIONS
Among French anesthesia researchers, an active presence on Twitter is associated with higher scientific publication and citations.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34652279
pii: v23i10e29809
doi: 10.2196/29809
pmc: PMC8556638
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Observational Study
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e29809Informations de copyright
©Thomas Clavier, Emilie Occhiali, Zoé Demailly, Vincent Compère, Benoit Veber, Jean Selim, Emmanuel Besnier. Originally published in the Journal of Medical Internet Research (https://www.jmir.org), 15.10.2021.
Références
Anaesth Crit Care Pain Med. 2020 Dec;39(6):745-746
pubmed: 33308590
JAMA Intern Med. 2019 Dec 1;179(12):1726-1729
pubmed: 31609393
J Surg Educ. 2017 Jan - Feb;74(1):79-83
pubmed: 27993626
Ann Thorac Surg. 2021 Jan;111(1):296-300
pubmed: 32504611
Eur Heart J. 2020 Sep 7;41(34):3222-3225
pubmed: 32306033
ANZ J Surg. 2019 Jun;89(6):733-737
pubmed: 30347493
PLoS One. 2013 May 28;8(5):e64841
pubmed: 23724101
Br J Anaesth. 2020 Mar;124(3):e178-e184
pubmed: 31987471
PLoS One. 2020 Sep 2;15(9):e0238583
pubmed: 32877458
J Am Coll Radiol. 2017 May;14(5):596-602
pubmed: 28268163
J Pediatr Orthop. 2017 Oct/Nov;37(7):e436-e439
pubmed: 28719545
Med Sci (Paris). 2017 Jun-Jul;33(6-7):647-652
pubmed: 28990568
J Med Internet Res. 2011 Dec 19;13(4):e123
pubmed: 22173204
Med Teach. 2018 Sep;40(sup1):S77-S82
pubmed: 29732945
World Neurosurg. 2019 Jul;127:e950-e956
pubmed: 30965167
JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2020 Sep 24;8(9):e23153
pubmed: 32924946
PLoS One. 2015 Mar 17;10(3):e0120495
pubmed: 25780916
Med J Islam Repub Iran. 2020 Oct 22;34:142
pubmed: 33437738
Anaesth Crit Care Pain Med. 2020 Dec;39(6):883-885
pubmed: 33130015