The DOI matches its Crossref record; 29 of the 29 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Twitter as a tool for communication and knowledge exchange in academic medicine: A guide for skeptics and novices
Abstract
Twitter is a tool for physicians to increase engagement of learners and the public, share scientific information, crowdsource new ideas, conduct, discuss and challenge emerging research, pursue professional development and continuing medical education, expand networks around specialized topics and provide moral support to colleagues. However, new users or skeptics may well be wary of its potential pitfalls. The aims of this commentary are to discuss the potential advantages of the Twitter platform for dialogue among physicians, to explore the barriers to accurate and high-quality healthcare discourse and, finally, to recommend potential safeguards physicians may employ against these threats in order to participate productively.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation.
Bloch, M., Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1994) · Man · doi:10.2307/2804509 · Cited by 39,454
Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511815355 · Cited by 35,324
(2011) · Cited by 14,317
Eysenbach, G. (2011) · Journal of Medical Internet Research · doi:10.2196/jmir.2012 · Cited by 1,083
Maher, C. A., Lewis, L. K., Ferrar, K., Marshall, S., De Bourdeaudhuij, I., & Vandelanotte, C. (2014) · Journal of Medical Internet Research · doi:10.2196/jmir.2952 · Cited by 733
Will disruptive innovations cure health care?
Johnson, D. E. (2000) · PubMed · Cited by 482
Online Posting of Unprofessional Content by Medical Students
Chretien, K. C. (2009) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.2009.1387 · Cited by 448
The Intersection of Online Social Networking with Medical Professionalism
Thompson, L. A., Dawson, K., Ferdig, R., Black, E. W., Boyer, J., Coutts, J., & Black, N. P. (2008) · Journal of General Internal Medicine · doi:10.1007/s11606-008-0538-8 · Cited by 425
Farnan, J. M., Snyder Sulmasy, L., Worster, B. K., Chaudhry, H. J., Rhyne, J. A., Arora, V. M., for the American College of Physicians Ethics, P. A. H. R. C., the American College of Physicians Council of Associates, & the Federation of State Medical Boards Special Committee on Ethics and Professionalism* (2013) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/0003-4819-158-8-201304160-00100 · Cited by 420
Online professionalism and the mirror of social media.
Greysen, S. R., Kind, T., & Chretien, K. C. (2010) · Journal of General Internal Medicine · doi:10.1007/s11606-010-1447-1 · Cited by 323 · cited 3×
“However, as with other forms of media and social media that preceded Twitter, its potential for good comes along with potential pitfalls (Chretien et al. 2009; Greysen et al. 2010; Bosslet 2011; Strausburg 2011; McKee 2013).”
Background
Cited by
Supporting the development of a professional identity: General principles
Cruess, S. R., Cruess, R. L., & Steinert, Y. (2019) · Medical Teacher · doi:10.1080/0142159x.2018.1536260 · Cited by 490
The Use of Social Media in Graduate Medical Education: A Systematic Review
Sterling, M., Leung, P., Wright, D., & Bishop, T. F. (2017) · Academic Medicine · doi:10.1097/acm.0000000000001617 · Cited by 365
Using e-technologies in clinical trials
Rosa, C., Campbell, A. N. C., Miele, G. M., Brunner, M., & Winstanley, E. L. (2015) · Contemporary Clinical Trials · doi:10.1016/j.cct.2015.07.007 · Cited by 147
Social Media for Networking, Professional Development, and Patient Engagement
Markham, M. J., Gentile, D., & Graham, D. L. (2017) · American Society of Clinical Oncology Educational Book · doi:10.1200/edbk_180077 · Cited by 117
Jabbour, D., Masri, J. E., Nawfal, R., Malaeb, D., & Salameh, P. (2023) · Irish Journal of Medical Science (1971 -) · doi:10.1007/s11845-022-02936-9 · Cited by 46
Metadata
- Authors
- Choo, E. K., Ranney, M. L., Chan, T. M., Trueger, N. S., Walsh, A. E., Tegtmeyer, K., McNamara, S. O., Choi, R. Y., & Carroll, C. L.
- Venue
- Medical Teacher
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2014-12-19
- Volume
- 37
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 411-416
- ISSN
- 0142-159X (ISSN-L)
- 1466-187X
- OpenAlex
- W2103241690
- Cited by
- 272
- References
- 29
- FWCI
- 17.59
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Twitter as a tool for communication and knowledge exchange in academic medicine: A guide for skeptics and novices. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.3109/0142159x.2014.993371
- The paper
- Choo, E. K., Ranney, M. L., Chan, T. M., Trueger, N. S., Walsh, A. E., Tegtmeyer, K., McNamara, S. O., Choi, R. Y., & Carroll, C. L. (2015). Twitter as a tool for communication and knowledge exchange in academic medicine: A guide for skeptics and novices. Medical Teacher. https://doi.org/10.3109/0142159x.2014.993371
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
