Premium
Twitter in urology and other surgical specialties at global conferences
Author(s) -
Chung Amanda,
Woo Henry
Publication year - 2016
Publication title -
anz journal of surgery
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.426
H-Index - 70
eISSN - 1445-2197
pISSN - 1445-1433
DOI - 10.1111/ans.13393
Subject(s) - medicine , general surgery , urology
Background Over recent years, T witter has demonstrated an expanding role in scientific discussion, surgical news and conferences. This study evaluates the role of T witter in urological conferences, with comparison to other surgical specialties. Methods A retrospective analysis of T witter metrics during the two largest recent E nglish‐speaking conferences for each surgical specialty was performed. Using www.symplur.com , all ‘tweets’ under the official conference hashtag from 0000 hour the first day to 24.00 hour the final day were assessed. The number of impressions, ‘tweeters’ and rates of ‘tweeting’ were analysed. Results Nine of 18 conferences examined had official hashtags registered with S ymplur H ealthcare H ashtags. Plastic and urological surgery had both major conferences registered. Only one of two conferences for each cardiothoracic, general, orthopaedic, otolaryngology and paediatric was registered. Both major neurosurgical and vascular conferences were unregistered. Urological conferences were associated with significantly more T witter activity than non‐urological surgical conferences in all parameters, with greater than triple the number of impressions, tweets and ‘tweeters’. Urological surgical conferences were associated with 337% more tweets and 164% more impressions per conference day, than non‐urological surgical conferences. Conclusion Twitter has been used to supplement surgical conferences. In this regard, the urological community leads the way compared to the remainder of surgical specialty communities.