↓ Skip to main content

Online Professionalism—2018 Update of European Association of Urology (@Uroweb) Recommendations on the Appropriate Use of Social Media

Overview of attention for article published in European Urology, September 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (97th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (92nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
144 tweeters

Readers on

mendeley
9 Mendeley
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
Online Professionalism—2018 Update of European Association of Urology (@Uroweb) Recommendations on the Appropriate Use of Social Media
Published in
European Urology, September 2018
DOI 10.1016/j.eururo.2018.08.022
Pubmed ID
Authors

Hendrik Borgmann, Matthew Cooperberg, Declan Murphy, Stacy Loeb, James N’Dow, Maria Jose Ribal, Henry Woo, Morgan Rouprêt, Andrew Winterbottom, Carl Wijburg, Manfred Wirth, James Catto, Alexander Kutikov

Abstract

Social media (SoMe) has transformed communication among health care professionals by enabling rapid and global information exchange. Yet, the novelty of SoMe and concerns about potential risks continue to be barriers to adoption. To encourage appropriate professional use of SoMe by physicians in concordance with best practices and to update practical guidelines for effective and professional use of these communication technologies. The European Association of Urology (EAU; @Uroweb) brought together a committee of SoMe stakeholders in the urology field. PubMed and the grey literature were searched to identify SoMe position papers by other medical societies and organizations. Updated practical guidelines for effective and professional use of SoMe communication technologies. A core of 10 practical recommendations for the responsible, ethical, and constructive use of SoMe communication technologies was articulated. The guidelines are limited by their inherent subjective nature and lack of robust evidence supporting their utility. SoMe is reshaping the way the urological care providers communicate; however, appropriate engagement requires courtesy, professionalism, and honesty. Adherence to guidelines will help users harness the benefits of SoMe in a safe and effective manner. Social media has transformed communication among health care professionals. This narrative review article provides an update of practical guidelines for effective and professional use of these communication technologies.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 144 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 9 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 9 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Unspecified 3 33%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 22%
Student > Master 1 11%
Student > Bachelor 1 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 11%
Other 1 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Unspecified 3 33%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 11%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 11%
Arts and Humanities 1 11%
Linguistics 1 11%
Other 2 22%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 100. 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 06 December 2018.
All research outputs
#131,968
of 12,271,791 outputs
Outputs from European Urology
#59
of 3,872 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#5,993
of 251,558 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Urology
#12
of 155 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,271,791 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,872 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% 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 251,558 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 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 155 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 92% of its contemporaries.