↓ Skip to main content

Unprofessional content on Facebook accounts of US urology residency graduates

Overview of attention for article published in British Journal of Urology, April 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • One of the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#7 of 5,389)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (99th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
18 news outlets
blogs
2 blogs
twitter
316 tweeters
facebook
2 Facebook pages
googleplus
1 Google+ user
reddit
3 Redditors

Citations

dimensions_citation
40 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
39 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Unprofessional content on Facebook accounts of US urology residency graduates
Published in
British Journal of Urology, April 2017
DOI 10.1111/bju.13846
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kevin Koo, Zita Ficko, E. Ann Gormley

Abstract

To characterize unprofessional content on public Facebook accounts of contemporary US urology residency graduates. Facebook was queried with the names of all urologists who graduated from US urology residency programmes in 2015 to identify publicly accessible profiles. Profiles were assessed for unprofessional or potentially objectionable content using a prospectively designed rubric, based on professionalism guidelines by the American Urological Association, the American Medical Association, and the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education. Content authorship (self vs other) was determined, and profiles were reviewed for self-identification as a urologist. Of 281 graduates, 223 (79%) were men and 267 (95%) held MD degrees. A total of 201 graduates (72%) had publicly identifiable Facebook profiles. Of these, 80 profiles (40%) included unprofessional or potentially objectionable content, including 27 profiles (13%) reflecting explicitly unprofessional behaviour, such as depictions of intoxication, uncensored profanity, unlawful behaviour, and confidential patient information. When unprofessional content was found, the content was self-authored in 82% of categories. Among 85 graduates (42%) who self-identified as a urologist on social media, nearly half contained concerning content. No differences in content were found between men and women, MD and DO degree-holders, or those who did or did not identify as a urologist (all P > 0.05). The majority of recent residency graduates had publicly accessible Facebook profiles, and a substantial proportion contained self-authored unprofessional content. Of those identifying as urologists on Facebook, approximately half violated published professionalism guidelines. Greater awareness of trainees' online identities is needed.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 316 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 39 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 3%
Unknown 38 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 8 21%
Student > Postgraduate 5 13%
Researcher 5 13%
Student > Master 4 10%
Student > Bachelor 3 8%
Other 8 21%
Unknown 6 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 23 59%
Social Sciences 3 8%
Computer Science 2 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 5%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 3%
Other 2 5%
Unknown 6 15%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 379. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 02 August 2020.
All research outputs
#47,366
of 18,428,504 outputs
Outputs from British Journal of Urology
#7
of 5,389 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#1,628
of 275,842 outputs
Outputs of similar age from British Journal of Urology
#1
of 79 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 18,428,504 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,389 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 275,842 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 79 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.