Skip to main content
×
Home

The impact of social media promotion with infographics and podcasts on research dissemination and readership

  • Brent Thoma (a1), Heather Murray (a2), Simon York Ming Huang (a1), William Ken Milne (a3), Lynsey J. Martin (a1), Christopher M. Bond (a4), Rohit Mohindra (a5), Alvin Chin (a6), Calvin H. Yeh (a7), William B. Sanderson (a8) and Teresa M. Chan (a6)...
Abstract
Abstract Objective

In 2015 and 2016, the Canadian Journal of Emergency Medicine (CJEM) Social Media (SoMe) Team collaborated with established medical websites to promote CJEM articles using podcasts and infographics while tracking dissemination and readership.

Methods

CJEM publications in the “Original Research” and “State of the Art” sections were selected by the SoMe Team for podcast and infographic promotion based on their perceived interest to emergency physicians. A control group was composed retrospectively of articles from the 2015 and 2016 issues with the highest Altmetric score that received standard Facebook and Twitter promotions. Studies on SoMe topics were excluded. Dissemination was quantified by January 1, 2017 Altmetric scores. Readership was measured by abstract and full-text views over a 3-month period. The number needed to view (NNV) was calculated by dividing abstract views by full-text views.

Results

Twenty-nine of 88 articles that met inclusion were included in the podcast (6), infographic (11), and control (12) groups. Descriptive statistics (mean, 95% confidence interval) were calculated for podcast (Altmetric: 61, 42-80; Abstract: 1795, 1135-2455; Full-text: 431, 0-1031), infographic (Altmetric: 31.5, 19-43; Abstract: 590, 361-819; Full-text: 65, 33-98), and control (Altmetric: 12, 8-15; Abstract: 257, 159-354; Full-Text: 73, 38-109) articles. The NNV was 4.2 for podcast, 9.0 for infographic, and 3.5 for control articles.

Discussion

Limitations included selection bias, the influence of SoMe promotion on the Altmetric scores, and a lack of generalizability to other journals.

Conclusion

Collaboration with established SoMe websites using podcasts and infographics was associated with increased Altmetric scores and abstract views but not full-text article views.

RÉSUMÉ Contexte

En 2015-2016, l’équipe des médias sociaux du Journal canadien de la médecine d’urgence a travaillé en collaboration avec des équipes de sites Web médicaux établis afin de faire la promotion d’articles du Journal par la baladodiffusion et l’infographie, et de suivre l’évolution de la diffusion et du lectorat.

Méthode

Le choix des articles du Journal, parus dans les sections Original Research et State of the Art en vue de la promotion par la baladodiffusion et l’infographie a été effectué par l’équipe des médias sociaux d’après sa perception de l’intérêt pour les médecins d’urgence. Un groupe témoin d’articles parus dans les numéros de 2015 et de 2016 et ayant fait l’objet de la promotion habituelle dans Facebook and Twitter a été constitué de manière rétrospective à l’aide des scores Altmetric les plus élevés. Les études portant sur des sujets liés aux médias sociaux ont été écartées. En ce qui concerne la diffusion, elle a été quantifiée selon les scores Altmetric en date du 1er janvier 2017. Quant au lectorat, il a été mesuré à l’aide du nombre de visionnements de résumés ou d’articles en version intégrale sur une période de 3 mois. Le nombre requis de visionnements (NRV) a été calculé par la division du nombre de visionnements de résumés par celui d’articles en version intégrale.

Résultats

Sur 88 articles qui respectaient les critères d’inclusion, 29 ont été répartis comme suit : 6 dans le groupe de la baladodiffusion, 11 dans celui de l’infographie et 12 dans le groupe témoin. Des statistiques descriptives (moyenne : IC à 95 %) ont été calculées pour la baladodiffusion (score Altmetric : 61→42-80; résumé : 1795→1135-2455; texte en version intégrale : 431→0-1031), pour l’infographie (score Altmetric : 31,5→19-43; résumé : 590→361-819; texte en version intégrale : 65→33-98) et pour les articles témoins (score Altmetric : 12→8-15; résumé : 257→159-354; texte en version intégrale : 73→38-109). Le NRV a atteint 4,2 pour la baladodiffusion; 9,0 pour l’infographie et 3,5 pour les articles témoins.

Discussion

Les points faibles comprenaient un biais de sélection, l’influence de la promotion des médias sociaux sur les scores Altmetric et le manque de généralisation à d’autres revues.

Conclusion

La collaboration avec des équipes de sites Web de médias sociaux à l’aide de la baladodiffusion et de l’infographie a été associée à une augmentation des scores Altmetric ainsi que du nombre de visionnements des résumés mais pas à une augmentation du nombre de visionnements des articles en version intégrale.

Copyright
Corresponding author
Correspondence to: Dr. Brent Thoma, Department of Emergency Medicine, University of Saskatchewan, Room 2646, Box 16, 103 Hospital Drive, Saskatoon, SK S7N 0W8; Email: brent.thoma@usask.ca
References
Hide All
1. Li LC, Grimshaw JM, Nielsen C, et al. Evolution of Wenger’s concept of community of practice. Implement Sci 2009;4(1):11, 10.1186/1748-5908-4-11.
2. Wenger E. Communities of practice: learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press; 1990.
3. Thoma B, Paddock M, Purdy E, et al. Leveraging a virtual community of practice to participate in a survey-based study: a description of the METRIQ Study Methodology. Acad Emerg Med Educ Train 2017;1(2):110-113, 10.1002/aet2.10013.
4. Thoma B, Mohindra R, Artz JD, et al. CJEM and the changing landscape of medical education and knowledge translation. CJEM 2015;17(2):184-187, 10.1017/cem.2015.16.
5. Chan T, Trueger NS, Roland D, et al. Evidence-based medicine in the era of social media: scholarly engagement through participation and online interaction. CJEM 2017;epub, 10.1017/cem.2016.407.
6. Mallin M, Schlein S, Doctor S, et al. A survey of the current utilization of asynchronous education among emergency medicine residents in the United States. Acad Med 2014;89(4):598-601, 10.1097/ACM.0000000000000170.
7. Purdy E, Thoma B, Bednarczyk J, et al. The use of free online educational resources by Canadian emergency medicine residents and program directors. Can J Emerg Med 2015;17(2):101-106, 10.1017/cem.2014.73.
8. Lulic I, Kovic I. Analysis of emergency physicians’ Twitter accounts. Emerg Med J 2013;30(5):371-376, 10.1136/emermed-2012-201132.
9. Bigham B. The “top five changes” project: 2015 AHA guidelines on CPR + ECC update infographic series. CanadiEM; 2015. Available at: https://canadiem.org/the-top-five-changes-project-2015-aha-guidelines-update-cpr-ecc-infographic-series/ (accessed 8 July 2017).
10. Lin M, Thoma B, Trueger NS, et al. Quality indicators for blogs and podcasts used in medical education: modified Delphi consensus recommendations by an international cohort of health professions educators. Postgrad Med J 2015;91(1080):546-550, 10.1136/postgradmedj-2014-133230.
11. Thoma B, Chan TM, Paterson QS, et al. Emergency medicine and critical care blogs and podcasts: establishing an international consensus on quality. Ann Emerg Med 2015;66(4):396-402.e4, 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2015.03.002.
12. Chan T, Thoma B, Krishnan K, et al. The derivation of two simplified critical appraisal scores for use by trainees to evaluate online educational resources: a METRIQ study. West J Emerg Med 2016;17(5):574-584, 10.5811/westjem.2016.6.30825.
13. Chan TM, Grock A, Paddock M, et al. Examining reliability and validity of an online score (ALiEM AIR) for rating free open access medical education resources. Ann Emerg Med 2016;68(6):729-735, 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2016.02.018.
14. Fox CS, Bonaca MP, Ryan JJ, et al. A randomized trial of social media from circulation. Circulation 2015;138:28-33, 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.114.013509.
15. Fox CS, Gurary EB, Ryan J, et al. Randomized controlled trial of social media: effect of increased intensity of the intervention. J Am Heart Assoc 2016;5(5):1-9, 10.1161/JAHA.115.003088.
16. Hawkins MC, Hunter M, Kolenic GE, et al. Social media and peer-reviewed medical journal readership: a randomized prospective controlled trial. J Am Coll Radiol 2017;14(5):596-602, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jacr.2016.12.024.
17. Purdy E, Thoma B, Milne K, et al. SGEM Hot Off the Press: hypertonic saline in severe traumatic brain injury: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. CJEM 2016;18(5):379-384, 10.1017/cem.2016.374.
18. McKenna P, Thoma B, Milne K, et al. SGEM Hot Off the Press: ultrasound during critical care simulation: a randomized crossover study. Can J Emerg Med 2016;16(4):1-5, 10.1017/cem.2016.380.
19. Trueger NS, Thoma B, Hsu CH, et al. The Altmetric score: A new measure for article-level dissemination and impact. Ann Emerg Med 2015;66(5):549-553, 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2015.04.022.
20. Page View. Wikipedia. Available at: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Page_view (accessed 5 July 2017).
21. Pathman DE, Konrad TR, Freed GL, et al. The awareness-to-adherence model of the steps to clinical guideline compliance. The case of pediatric vaccine recommendations. Med Care 1996;34(9):873-889, 10.1097/00005650-199609000-00002.
22. Diner BM, Carpenter CR, O’Connell T, et al. Graduate medical education and knowledge translation: role models, information pipelines, and practice change thresholds. Acad Emerg Med 2007;14(11):1008-1014, 10.1197/j.aem.2007.07.003.
23. Carpenter CR, Sherbino J. How does an “opinion leader” influence my practice? Can J Emerg Med 2010;12(5):431-434, 10.1016/j.biotechadv.2011.08.021.
24. Ibrahim AM, Lillemoe KD, Klingensmith ME, et al. Visual abstracts to disseminate research on social media: a prospective, case-control crossover study. Ann Surg 2017;epub, doi: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000002277.
25. Prince M. Does active learning work? A review of the research. J Eng Educ 2004;93(3):223-232, 10.1002/j.2168-9830.2004.tb00809.x.
26. Linton DL, Pangle WM, Wyatt KH, et al. Identifying key features of effective active learning: the effects of writing and peer discussion. CBE-Life Sci Educ 2014;13(3):469-477, 10.1187/cbe.13-12-0242.
27. Michael J. Where’s the evidence that active learning works? Adv Physiol Educ 2006;30(4):159-167, 10.1152/advan.00053.2006.
28. Chan TM, Thoma B, Radecki R, et al. Ten steps for setting up an online journal club. J Contin Educ Health Prof 2015;35(2):148-154, 10.1002/chp.
29. Lin M, Joshi N, Hayes BD, et al. Accelerating knowledge translation: reflections from the online ALiEM-Annals Global Emergency Medicine Journal Club Experience. Ann Emerg Med 2017;69(4):469-474, 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2016.11.010.
30. Wenger E, McDermott R, Snyder WM. Cultivating communities of practice. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press; 2002.
31. Broaddus A, Riddell J, Brown A, et al. Who are the most influential emergency physicians on Twitter? West J Emerg Med 2017;18(2):281-287, 10.5811/westjem.2016.11.31299.
32. Thoma B, Sanders JL, Lin M, et al. The Social media index: measuring the impact of emergency medicine and critical care websites. West J Emerg Med 2015;16(2):242-249, 10.5811/westjem.2015.1.24860.
Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

Canadian Journal of Emergency Medicine
  • ISSN: -
  • EISSN: 1481-8035
  • URL: /core/journals/canadian-journal-of-emergency-medicine
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
×

Keywords:

Metrics

Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 5
Total number of PDF views: 44 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 598 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between 13th September 2017 - 23rd November 2017. This data will be updated every 24 hours.