Cited by 236Social Media in Health EducationAcademic Publishing and Open AccessSocial Media and Politics

Physicians on Twitter

Katherine Chang Chretien, Justin M. Azar, Terry Kind·2011·JAMA

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1001/jama.2011.68

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Use of social media by physicians has grown exponentially.

    “The use of social media (SM) by physicians, including Facebook, Instagram, and Twitter, has grown exponentially. 1-3”
  • Prior literature has highlighted both benefits and risks of social media in healthcare, but there remains limited understanding of how generational perspectives shape views of professionalism in healthcare social media use.

    “Prior literature has highlighted both benefits and risks of social media in healthcare,4–13 but there remains limited understanding of how generational perspectives shape views of professionalism in healthcare social media use.”
  • Some physician tweets contain suspect product promotions.

    “Some physician tweets also contain suspect product promotions.44”

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Chretien, K. C., Azar, J. M., & Kind, T.
Affiliations
Washington DC VA Medical Center (US)
Venue
JAMA
Published
2011-02-09
Volume
305
Issue
6
Pages
566
ISSN
  • 0002-9955 (ISSN-L)
  • 0098-7484
OpenAlex
W149915781
Cited by
236
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 14 · 2020: 17 · 2019: 17 · 2018: 12 · 2017: 17 · 2016: 20 · 2015: 15 · 2014: 20 · 2013: 22 · 2012: 33
FWCI
28.72
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • JAMA (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DigitalGeorgetown (Georgetown University Library) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Health › Social Media in Health Education
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Academic Publishing and Open Access
  • Social Sciences › Communication › Social Media and Politics
Keywords
physicians, Twitter, social media, physician social media use, professional communication
MeSH terms
Confidentiality, Ethics, Professional, Health Services, Indigenous, Humans, Physicians, Professional Competence, United States, Conflict of Interest, Blogging

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review