Qualitative Twitter analysis of participants, tweet strategies, and tweet content at a major urologic conference

Authors

  • Hendrik Borgmann University Hospital Frankfurt
  • Jan-Henning Woelm University Hospital Frankfurt
  • Axel Merseburger University Hospital Luebeck
  • Tim Nestler Armed Forces Hospital Koblenz
  • Johannes Salem St Joseph Hospital Dortmund
  • Maximilian P. Brandt University Hospital Frankfurt
  • Axel Haferkamp University Hospital Frankfurt
  • Stacy Loeb New York University and Manhattan Veterans Affairs Medical Center

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.5489/cuaj.3322

Abstract

Introduction: The microblogging social media platform Twitter is increasingly being adopted in the urologic field. We aimed to analyze participants, tweet strategies, and tweet content of the Twitter discussion at a urologic conference.

Methods: A comprehensive analysis of the Twitter activity at the European Association of Urology Congress 2013 (#eau2013) was performed, including characteristics of user profiles, engagement and popularity measurements, characteristics and timing of tweets, and content analysis.

Results: Of 218 Twitter contributors, doctors (45%) were the most frequent, ahead of associations (15%), companies (10%), and journals (3%). However, journals had the highest tweet/participant rate (22 tweets/participant), profile activity (median: 1177 total tweets, 1805 followers, 979 following), and profile popularity (follower/following ratio: 2.1; retweet rank percentile: 96%). Links in a profile were associated with higher engagement (p<0.0001) and popularity (p<0.0001). Of 1572 tweets, 57% were original tweets, 71% contained mentions, 20% contained links, and 25% included pictures. The majority of tweets (88%) were during conference hours, with an average of 24.7 tweets/hour and a peak activity of 71 tweets/hour. Overall, 59% tweets were informative, led by the topics uro-oncology (21%), urologic research (21%), and urotechnology (12%). Limitations include the analysis of a single conference, assessment of global profile and not domain-specific activity, and the rapid evolution in Twitter-using habits.

Conclusion: Results of this qualitative analysis are promising for an enrichment of the scientific discussions at urologic conferences through the use of Twitter.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Downloads

Published

2016-02-16

How to Cite

Borgmann, H., Woelm, J.-H., Merseburger, A., Nestler, T., Salem, J., Brandt, M. P., Haferkamp, A., & Loeb, S. (2016). Qualitative Twitter analysis of participants, tweet strategies, and tweet content at a major urologic conference. Canadian Urological Association Journal, 10(1-2), 39–44. https://doi.org/10.5489/cuaj.3322

Issue

Vol. 10 No. 1-2 (2016): CUAJ February

Section

Original Research

License

You, the Author(s), assign your copyright in and to the Article to the Canadian Urological Association. This means that you may not, without the prior written permission of the CUA:

  • Post the Article on any Web site
  • Translate or authorize a translation of the Article
  • Copy or otherwise reproduce the Article, in any format, beyond what is permitted under Canadian copyright law, or authorize others to do so
  • Copy or otherwise reproduce portions of the Article, including tables and figures, beyond what is permitted under Canadian copyright law, or authorize others to do so.

The CUA encourages use for non-commercial educational purposes and will not unreasonably deny any such permission request.

You retain your moral rights in and to the Article. This means that the CUA may not assert its copyright in such a way that would negatively reflect on your reputation or your right to be associated with the Article.

The CUA also requires you to warrant the following:

  • That you are the Author(s) and sole owner(s), that the Article is original and unpublished and that you have not previously assigned copyright or granted a licence to any other third party;
  • That all individuals who have made a substantive contribution to the article are acknowledged;
  • That the Article does not infringe any proprietary right of any third party and that you have received the permissions necessary to include the work of others in the Article; and
  • That the Article does not libel or violate the privacy rights of any third party.