背景#OrthoTwitter已经发展到传播调查结果并吸引公众。然而,在骨科手术中使用Twitter的学术影响尚不清楚.问题/目的研究的目的是评估作者与手稿Twitter活动和引用之间的关系。方法对2018年17种骨科期刊的稿件进行鉴定。引文,网上提到,影响因素,并获得了亚专业。作者的H-index和Twitter帐户详细信息是针对手稿的子集获得的。评估了Twitter活动与引用之间的关系。结果在Twitter上提到了2,473/4,224(58.5%)手稿(n=29,958次提及),Twitter手稿被引用的频率更高(中位数为10vs.7,p<0.0001)。Twitter提到,影响因素,非开放访问状态,亚专业与引文计数有关。在10、100和1,000Tweet中提到的文章被观察到有1.1倍,1.7倍,引文增加245倍。在作者层面的分析中,156名(20.0%)和216名(27.7%)资深作者拥有Twitter帐户。引文计数与高级作者H指数的增加相关(βest=0.13,p<0.05),Twitter提到(βest=0.0043,p<0.0001),影响因子(βest=0.13,p<0.0001),在Twitter上有第一作者(βest=0.20,p<0.05)或资深作者(βest=0.17,p<0.05)。在关节成形术中发表的文章(βest=0.49,p<0.05),一般利息(βest=0.55,p<0.01),运动(βest=0.63,p<0.01),非开放获取期刊(βest=0.41,p<0.001)被引用更多。H指数与第一作者(rho=0.31,p<0.0001)和高级作者(rho=0.44,p<0.0001)的追随者相关。结论作者Twitter利用与稿件引用独立相关。作者应该意识到社交媒体利用与传统学术影响之间的潜在关联。了解社交媒体利用与学术影响之间的关系对于有效传播研究是必要的。
Background #OrthoTwitter has evolved to disseminate findings and engage the public. However, the academic impact of Twitter utilization in orthopaedic surgery is unknown. Questions/purposes The purpose of the study was to evaluate relationships between the author and manuscript Twitter activity and citations. Methods Manuscripts in 17 orthopaedic journals from 2018 were identified. Citations, online mentions, impact factors, and subspecialties were obtained. H-index and Twitter account details for authors were obtained for a subset of manuscripts. Relationships between Twitter activity and citations were evaluated. Results 2,473/4,224 (58.5%) manuscripts were mentioned on Twitter (n=29,958 mentions), with Twitter manuscripts cited more frequently (median 10 vs. 7, p<0.0001). Twitter mentions, impact factors, non-open-access status, and subspecialties were associated with citation counts. Articles mentioned in 10, 100, and 1,000 Tweets were observed to have a 1.1-fold, 1.7-fold, and 245-fold increase in citations. In author-level analyses, 156 (20.0%) first and 216 (27.7%) senior authors had Twitter accounts. Citation count was associated with increasing senior author H-index (β est=0.13, p<0.05), Twitter mentions (β est=0.0043, p<0.0001), impact factors (β est=0.13, p<0.0001), and having a first (β est=0.20, p<0.05) or senior author (β est=0.17, p<0.05) on Twitter. Articles published in arthroplasty (β est=0.49, p<0.05), general interest (β est=0.55, p<0.01), sports (β est=0.63, p<0.01), and non-open access journals (β est=0.41, p<0.001) were cited more. H-index correlated with followers for first (rho=0.31, p<0.0001) and senior authors (rho=0.44, p<0.0001). Conclusion Author Twitter utilization is independently associated with manuscript citations. Authors should be aware of the potential association between social media utilization and traditional academic impact. Understanding the relationship between social media utilization and academic impact is necessary to effectively disseminate research.