-
Mashup Score: 17Access to Clinic Appointments for New Patients With Cancer - 7 month(s) ago
This cross-sectional study analyzes linguistic and workflow barriers that prevent access to clinic appointments for patients with cancer.
Source: jamanetwork.comCategories: General Medicine News, Hem/OncsTweet
-
Mashup Score: 3American Medical Association | AMA - 7 month(s) ago
The American Medical Association, founded in 1847, represents more than 190 state societies and medical specialty associations, including internal medicine, family physician, OBGYN, pediatric and emergency medicine. The AMA is the largest association of physicians – both MDs and DOs – and medical students in the USA. Our mission is to “promote the art and science of medicine and the betterment of public health”.
Source: www.ama-assn.orgCategories: General Medicine News, Hem/OncsTweet
-
Mashup Score: 11Associations of Milestone Ratings and Certification Examination Scores With Patient Outcomes - 8 month(s) ago
This study examines the association between physicians’ milestone ratings and certification examination scores and hospital outcomes for their patients.
Source: jamanetwork.comCategories: General Medicine News, Hem/OncsTweet
-
Mashup Score: 25
Multiple studies across a variety of scientific disciplines have shown that the number of times that a paper is shared on Twitter (now called X) is correlated with the number of citations that paper receives. However, these studies were not designed to answer whether tweeting about scientific papers causes an increase in citations, or whether they were simply highlighting that some papers have higher relevance, importance or quality and are therefore both tweeted about more and cited more. The authors of this study are leading science communicators on Twitter from several life science disciplines, with substantially higher follower counts than the average scientist, making us uniquely placed to address this question. We conducted a three-year-long controlled experiment, randomly selecting five articles published in the same month and journal, and randomly tweeting one while retaining the others as controls. This process was repeated for 10 articles from each of 11 journals, recording A
Source: journals.plos.orgCategories: General Medicine News, Hem/OncsTweet
-
Mashup Score: 25
Multiple studies across a variety of scientific disciplines have shown that the number of times that a paper is shared on Twitter (now called X) is correlated with the number of citations that paper receives. However, these studies were not designed to answer whether tweeting about scientific papers causes an increase in citations, or whether they were simply highlighting that some papers have higher relevance, importance or quality and are therefore both tweeted about more and cited more. The authors of this study are leading science communicators on Twitter from several life science disciplines, with substantially higher follower counts than the average scientist, making us uniquely placed to address this question. We conducted a three-year-long controlled experiment, randomly selecting five articles published in the same month and journal, and randomly tweeting one while retaining the others as controls. This process was repeated for 10 articles from each of 11 journals, recording A
Source: journals.plos.orgCategories: General Medicine News, Hem/OncsTweet
-
Mashup Score: 25
Multiple studies across a variety of scientific disciplines have shown that the number of times that a paper is shared on Twitter (now called X) is correlated with the number of citations that paper receives. However, these studies were not designed to answer whether tweeting about scientific papers causes an increase in citations, or whether they were simply highlighting that some papers have higher relevance, importance or quality and are therefore both tweeted about more and cited more. The authors of this study are leading science communicators on Twitter from several life science disciplines, with substantially higher follower counts than the average scientist, making us uniquely placed to address this question. We conducted a three-year-long controlled experiment, randomly selecting five articles published in the same month and journal, and randomly tweeting one while retaining the others as controls. This process was repeated for 10 articles from each of 11 journals, recording A
Source: journals.plos.orgCategories: General Medicine News, Hem/OncsTweet
-
Mashup Score: 25
Multiple studies across a variety of scientific disciplines have shown that the number of times that a paper is shared on Twitter (now called X) is correlated with the number of citations that paper receives. However, these studies were not designed to answer whether tweeting about scientific papers causes an increase in citations, or whether they were simply highlighting that some papers have higher relevance, importance or quality and are therefore both tweeted about more and cited more. The authors of this study are leading science communicators on Twitter from several life science disciplines, with substantially higher follower counts than the average scientist, making us uniquely placed to address this question. We conducted a three-year-long controlled experiment, randomly selecting five articles published in the same month and journal, and randomly tweeting one while retaining the others as controls. This process was repeated for 10 articles from each of 11 journals, recording A
Source: journals.plos.orgCategories: General Medicine News, Hem/OncsTweet
-
Mashup Score: 25
Multiple studies across a variety of scientific disciplines have shown that the number of times that a paper is shared on Twitter (now called X) is correlated with the number of citations that paper receives. However, these studies were not designed to answer whether tweeting about scientific papers causes an increase in citations, or whether they were simply highlighting that some papers have higher relevance, importance or quality and are therefore both tweeted about more and cited more. The authors of this study are leading science communicators on Twitter from several life science disciplines, with substantially higher follower counts than the average scientist, making us uniquely placed to address this question. We conducted a three-year-long controlled experiment, randomly selecting five articles published in the same month and journal, and randomly tweeting one while retaining the others as controls. This process was repeated for 10 articles from each of 11 journals, recording A
Source: journals.plos.orgCategories: General Medicine News, Hem/OncsTweet
-
Mashup Score: 25
Multiple studies across a variety of scientific disciplines have shown that the number of times that a paper is shared on Twitter (now called X) is correlated with the number of citations that paper receives. However, these studies were not designed to answer whether tweeting about scientific papers causes an increase in citations, or whether they were simply highlighting that some papers have higher relevance, importance or quality and are therefore both tweeted about more and cited more. The authors of this study are leading science communicators on Twitter from several life science disciplines, with substantially higher follower counts than the average scientist, making us uniquely placed to address this question. We conducted a three-year-long controlled experiment, randomly selecting five articles published in the same month and journal, and randomly tweeting one while retaining the others as controls. This process was repeated for 10 articles from each of 11 journals, recording A
Source: journals.plos.orgCategories: General Medicine News, Hem/OncsTweet
-
Mashup Score: 25
Multiple studies across a variety of scientific disciplines have shown that the number of times that a paper is shared on Twitter (now called X) is correlated with the number of citations that paper receives. However, these studies were not designed to answer whether tweeting about scientific papers causes an increase in citations, or whether they were simply highlighting that some papers have higher relevance, importance or quality and are therefore both tweeted about more and cited more. The authors of this study are leading science communicators on Twitter from several life science disciplines, with substantially higher follower counts than the average scientist, making us uniquely placed to address this question. We conducted a three-year-long controlled experiment, randomly selecting five articles published in the same month and journal, and randomly tweeting one while retaining the others as controls. This process was repeated for 10 articles from each of 11 journals, recording A
Source: journals.plos.orgCategories: General Medicine News, Hem/OncsTweet
This study in @JAMANetworkOpen simulated 985 patient calls to 143 hospitals across 12 states to assess access to new visits for cancer. They found differences based on patient language and teaching vs non-teaching hospital: https://t.co/o4YLihP4YZ @DrLisaDiamond