Title |
Social media use among young rheumatologists and basic scientists: results of an international survey by the Emerging EULAR Network (EMEUNET)
|
---|---|
Published in |
Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases, October 2016
|
DOI | 10.1136/annrheumdis-2016-209718 |
Pubmed ID | |
Authors |
Elena Nikiphorou, Paul Studenic, Christian Gytz Ammitzbøll, Mary Canavan, Meghna Jani, Caroline Ospelt, Francis Berenbaum |
Abstract |
To explore perceptions, barriers and patterns of social media (SM) use among rheumatology fellows and basic scientists. An online survey was disseminated via Twitter, Facebook and by email to members of the Emerging European League Against Rheumatism Network. Questions focused on general demographics, frequency and types of SM use, reasons and barriers to SM use. Of 233 respondents (47 countries), 72% were aged 30-39 years, 66% female. 83% were active users of at least one SM platform and 71% were using SM professionally. The majority used SM for communicating with friends/colleagues (79%), news updates (76%), entertainment (69%), clinical (50%) and research (48%) updates. Facebook was the dominant platform used (91%). SM was reported to be used for information (81%); for expanding professional networks (76%); new resources (59%); learning new skills (47%) and establishing a professional online presence (46%). 30% of non-SM users justified not using SM due to lack of knowledge. There was a substantial use of SM by rheumatologists and basic scientists for social and professional reasons. The survey highlights a need for providing learning resources and increasing awareness of the use of SM. This could enhance communication, participation and collaborative work, enabling its more widespread use in a professional manner. |
Twitter Demographics
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
United Kingdom | 16 | 20% |
United States | 15 | 19% |
Ireland | 3 | 4% |
India | 3 | 4% |
South Africa | 2 | 3% |
France | 2 | 3% |
Italy | 2 | 3% |
Germany | 1 | 1% |
Brazil | 1 | 1% |
Other | 8 | 10% |
Unknown | 26 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
Type | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Members of the public | 44 | 56% |
Scientists | 15 | 19% |
Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 13 | 16% |
Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 7 | 9% |
Mendeley readers
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Australia | 1 | 2% |
Unknown | 60 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Student > Master | 13 | 21% |
Researcher | 10 | 16% |
Student > Bachelor | 7 | 11% |
Student > Ph. D. Student | 7 | 11% |
Lecturer | 2 | 3% |
Other | 6 | 10% |
Unknown | 16 | 26% |
Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Medicine and Dentistry | 22 | 36% |
Social Sciences | 5 | 8% |
Nursing and Health Professions | 4 | 7% |
Computer Science | 3 | 5% |
Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 3% |
Other | 8 | 13% |
Unknown | 17 | 28% |