Skip to main content
bioRxiv
  • Home
  • About
  • Submit
  • ALERTS / RSS
Advanced Search
New Results

Social media at metabolic meetings: who is tweeting what and for whom?

View ORCID ProfileJames Nurse
doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2022.08.16.504099
James Nurse
University Hospital Southampton NHS Trust
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for James Nurse
  • For correspondence: james.nurse@nhs.net
  • Abstract
  • Full Text
  • Info/History
  • Metrics
  • Preview PDF
Loading

Abstract

BACKGROUND The social media site Twitter has been widely embraced in medical circles for its ability to connect individuals and support rapid information sharing. Critics say that the messages shared may not accurately reflect what was said and that sharing meeting content could devalue conferences themselves. It is unclear how it is used at SSIEM and what value it may bring.

METHODS Twitter’s tweetdeck software was used to find all tweets containing the conference ‘hashtag’ #SSIEM2018. All tweets were reviewed to identify the author, see what had been shared and count replies, likes and retweets. Authors were grouped by professional background and tweet content was broken down by type of material shared and theme.

RESULTS 122 relevant tweets were sent during the fortnight at the beginning of September 2018, creating over 400,000 impressions. There were a further 73 replies with approximately 13 engagements (likes, replies or retweets) per tweet. 36 people wrote tweets (rate: 3.4 per person [1-33]). One quarter of the tweets shared poster content and over one third of tweets related to Phenylketonuria materials. 50 of the tweets were produced by just two accounts, both intended to provide information to patients and their families.

DISCUSSION Tweets where no hashtag was used cannot be identified and restrictions within Twitter prevent certain analyses on tweet data greater than 30 days old. However, Twitter uptake within metabolic medicine is significantly behind other specialities where conference tweets can exceed 20,000. Information shared is typically intended for patients rather than other health professionals; this suggests a different uptake to more mainstream specialities. Presenting teams should be aware that their work may be received directly by patients and families and consider how best to present their messages for all who may receive them.

Competing Interest Statement

The authors have declared no competing interest.

  • GLOSSARY

    Engagement
    The number of interactions people have with your content (i.e.: likes, comments, link clicks, profile clicks, retweets, etc.)11
    Hashtag
    The # symbol, called a hashtag, is used to mark keywords or topics in a Tweet. It was created organically by Twitter users as a way to categorize messages12.
    Impressions
    the number of times your content is displayed to users11.
    Reach
    the number of people who could see your content11.
    Reply
    A Tweet posted in reply to another user’s message, usually posted by clicking the “reply” button next to their Tweet in your timeline. Always begins with @username12.
    Retweet
    (verb) To retweet, retweeting, retweeted. The act of forwarding another user’s Tweet to all of your followers. (noun): A Tweet by another user, forwarded to you by someone you follow. Often used to spread news or share valuable findings on Twitter12.
    Social Media
    Interactive computer-mediated technologies that facilitate the creation and sharing of information, ideas, career interests and other forms of expression via virtual communities and networks. Typically built on web 2.0, featuring user generated content shared from specific user profiles and commonly designed to support the development of social networks.
    Twitter
    a microblogging and social networking service on which users post and interact with messages known as “tweets”.
  • Copyright 
    The copyright holder for this preprint is the author/funder, who has granted bioRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made available under a CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 International license.
    Back to top
    PreviousNext
    Posted August 16, 2022.
    Download PDF
    Email

    Thank you for your interest in spreading the word about bioRxiv.

    NOTE: Your email address is requested solely to identify you as the sender of this article.

    Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
    Social media at metabolic meetings: who is tweeting what and for whom?
    (Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from bioRxiv
    (Your Name) thought you would like to see this page from the bioRxiv website.
    CAPTCHA
    This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
    Share
    Social media at metabolic meetings: who is tweeting what and for whom?
    James Nurse
    bioRxiv 2022.08.16.504099; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2022.08.16.504099
    Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Google logo LinkedIn logo Mendeley logo
    Citation Tools
    Social media at metabolic meetings: who is tweeting what and for whom?
    James Nurse
    bioRxiv 2022.08.16.504099; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2022.08.16.504099

    Citation Manager Formats

    • BibTeX
    • Bookends
    • EasyBib
    • EndNote (tagged)
    • EndNote 8 (xml)
    • Medlars
    • Mendeley
    • Papers
    • RefWorks Tagged
    • Ref Manager
    • RIS
    • Zotero
    • Tweet Widget
    • Facebook Like
    • Google Plus One

    Subject Area

    • Scientific Communication and Education
    Subject Areas
    All Articles
    • Animal Behavior and Cognition (4079)
    • Biochemistry (8750)
    • Bioengineering (6467)
    • Bioinformatics (23315)
    • Biophysics (11719)
    • Cancer Biology (9135)
    • Cell Biology (13227)
    • Clinical Trials (138)
    • Developmental Biology (7404)
    • Ecology (11360)
    • Epidemiology (2066)
    • Evolutionary Biology (15078)
    • Genetics (10390)
    • Genomics (14001)
    • Immunology (9109)
    • Microbiology (22025)
    • Molecular Biology (8773)
    • Neuroscience (47317)
    • Paleontology (350)
    • Pathology (1419)
    • Pharmacology and Toxicology (2480)
    • Physiology (3701)
    • Plant Biology (8044)
    • Scientific Communication and Education (1427)
    • Synthetic Biology (2206)
    • Systems Biology (6009)
    • Zoology (1247)