key: cord-0867404-yuhze8z6
authors: Cormier, Matthew; Cushman, Mary
title: Innovation via social media – The importance of Twitter to science
date: 2021-03-11
journal: Res Pract Thromb Haemost
DOI: 10.1002/rth2.12493
sha: 90b5392848327d3bedaec26f280d55f8e985f45b
doc_id: 867404
cord_uid: yuhze8z6

nan

Social media ecosystems, fostered by online platforms such as Twitter, provide an environment where a wide range of individuals (experts and otherwise) can easily share, discuss, and engage with science. Its usage is a testament to the value that Twitter brings to researchers. One 2017 study reported that 1%-5% of Twitter's 187 million users are active scientists. 1, 2 From the individual scientist's point of view, one benefit of an active online presence, particularly on Twitter, is that it aids in the dissemination of your work. Your followers (and often their followers) will see your tweets, and Twitter's algorithm increases visibility further. Therefore, it is easy to understand how a tweet you craft could end up on the timeline of scientists in various fields, thus contributing to your reach. 3 This spread is not restricted to academia-in one study, followers of scientists on Twitter tended to have diverse nonacademic demographics. 4 With the growing call to include patients and other nonacademic parties in planning scientific research, this becomes increasingly important to consider. 5 The reach of social media has also contributed to the fast spread of knowledge across the world regarding the emergence of coronavirus disease 2019. 6 Wider distribution of your research can also increase its impact. This is why scientists strive to publish in the highest-profile journals.

Twitter can further amplify your reach and impact. Information you or others post about your work may grab the attention of someone who is planning their next experiment or writing their next manuscript or grant. A paper's Altmetric Attention Score is a good indicator of how widely a paper has been seen online, and it is no surprise that higher Altmetric scores are associated with greater numbers of citations. 7 Moreover, randomized studies have demonstrated that papers shared on social media have higher Altmetric scores and citation counts than papers that are not shared. 8, 9 Finally, a social media presence promotes conversation; it allows collaboration, networking, exchange of ideas, and constructive criticism. Surprisingly, a recent survey of researchers around the globe conducted by Nature found that Twitter was not the most popular platform used by scientists-13% of survey participants actively used it compared to just under 50% for ResearchGate. 10 However, the survey revealed that Twitter was the most popular for those who want to share their work, follow the discussions of others in their field, and converse with colleagues. 10 Much like interactions at scientific conferences, this ability to receive direct feedback on your work from friends and strangers alike can only improve and advance the science and your career.

Through our open-access, virtual platform at Research and Practice in Thrombosis and Haemostasis (RPTH), we aim to harness the power of social media to grow as a journal and help authors and readers, including the lay public. 11, 12 We intend that our posts, tailored to increase engagement with followers, promote discussion about the science.

At RPTH, our social media associate editor has a primary focus of fostering our online image and brand through disseminating published work. This allows us to continuously monitor and engage the thrombosis and hemostasis community. The vision has been provided previously. 12 As such, RPTH longitudinally tracks Twitter analytics to compare year after year to ensure that we meet our goals. Table 1 shows RPTH Twitter results for 2019 and 2020, with over 50% increases for different metrics. In 2020, RPTH crafted and posted 648 tweets. These tweets landed on Twitter users' timelines over 1.6 million times ("impressions") and garnered over 54 000 meaningful interactions ("engagements"; ie, the sum of the number of comments, retweets, likes, link clicks, and viewings of images). A majority of RPTH tweets summarize science and always includes a link to allow users to easily and quickly access the research. In addition, a figure accompanies each tweet, highlighting findings for easy consumption on a Twitter timeline from the comfort of one's phone.

In 2020, Twitter users clicked on links supplied in RPTH tweets 9381 times, compared to 3201 link clicks for tweets throughout 2019 (Table 1 ). It is difficult to know how many of these article visits would have been obtained without Twitter, but one could argue that seeing a link as one scrolls their timeline increases the likelihood of that person reading the paper. In fact, as evidence of success, 7.5% of traffic to the RPTH website last year was initiated from Twitter alone, higher than most journals we are aware of. icated associate editors, 13 we have branded ourselves as being at the forefront of developing innovative illustrated materials: Illustrated Review articles, infographics, Coag Capsules, and animated GIFs.

The impact of these novel publishing formats can be gauged by their citations and their social media reach. For instance, the Illustrated Review article type is the most cited article type at RPTH, emphasizing its value to the scientific community. These materials are also 

Moving forward, we encourage those who want to increase the impact of their research to become active on Twitter and other social media platforms-promote your work, participate in discussion, and define your brand. Authors publishing with us will continue to benefit from our work on their behalf to increase dissemination of their research. Ultimately, we hope to engage with others online to reap the benefits described above and move the field of thrombosis and hemostasis research forward.

The authors acknowledge the engagement of our authors and followers on Twitter, the dedicated RPTH associate editor team, and

Mr. Luke Blount from the ISTH for his contributions to our social media and marketing efforts.

M Cormier designed the analysis, conducted data analysis and drafted the article. M Cushman designed the analysis and provided revision and final approval of the article.

Editor in Chief of RPTH. 

Scholars on Twitter: who and how many are they? Int Conf Sci Inf

Twitter. Investor Fact Sheet (Q3'20) [Internet]. Investor Relations. 2020

A systematic identification of scientists on Twitter

Scientists on Twitter: preaching to the choir or singing from the rooftops? FACETS

Patient engagement: what partnering with patient in research is all about

Staying updated on COVID-19: social media to amplify science in thrombosis and hemostasis

Attention and citation: common interests of researchers and journals

Social media improves cardiothoracic surgery literature dissemination: results of a randomized trial

Twitter promotion predicts citation rates of cardiovascular articles: a preliminary analysis from the ESC journals randomized study

Online collaboration: scientists and the social network

Search engine optimization: what is it and why should we care?

Social media optimization in medicine: a journal's perspective

Illustrated Review article: a new format for disseminating scientific progress

Short and sweet science