FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W1967568093> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W1967568093 endingPage "891" @default.
• W1967568093 startingPage "889" @default.
• W1967568093 abstract "In 2013, Oxford Dictionary declared the word ‘‘selfie’’ word of the year (Oxford Dictionaries 2013). Social media (SM)-related words received similar titles in the past (Sumners 2010): ‘‘unfriend’’, ‘‘twitter’’ and ‘‘hashtag’’ to name a few (Oxford University Press Blog 2009; Global Language Monitor 2013). This confirms the degree of SM Table 1 penetration in our lives: 1.28 billion people use Facebook and 255 million use twitter (Smith 2014). The number of scientists that use SM, however, is difficult to estimate. A study found that 1 in 40 academics from 5 US and UK universities had a twitter account (Priem et al. 2012), while another reported that 13 % of researchers use some sort of social networking at least once per week (Research Information Network 2010). Scholars are reluctant to use twitter generally but are more likely to do so during a conference (Mahrt et al. 2014). The use of twitter, moreover, seems to differ between academic disciplines. The use of SM amongst scientists is increasing but remains limited (Bik and Goldstein 2013); age is not a good predictor of its use (Rowlands et al. 2011). In public health (PH), SM is widely used by leading institutions, and some well-respected professors. A review looked at how institutions and individuals use SM for PH science communication (Bjerglund-Andersen and Soderqvist 2012) and found that they use them for research dissemination, discussions and networking, teaching and research. Other studies have highlighted the importance of using SM for health communication and surveillance (Kass-Hout and Alhinnami 2013), knowledge translation (Mairs et al. 2013) and networking (Roman 2014). Using SM has a potentially high number of benefits for researchers like rapid distribution of research, networking, etc. (Bjerglund-Andersen and Soderqvist 2012), but the reluctance to use them seems to arise from lack of control, difficulty in assessing benefits and distrust due to lack of formal peer review (Bjerglund-Andersen and Soderqvist 2012; Research Information Network 2010). Moreover, SM are susceptible to negative effects, like false accusations or harmful criticism (Bjerglund-Andersen and Soderqvist 2012; Kunzli 2014; McKee 2014), which might make them less attractive to scientists. Scientific journals are increasingly using SM, ranging from adding ‘‘share’’ options under the online versions of their papers, to actively maintaining SM profiles or even writing a full editorial using previous tweets (Nature Chemistry 2013). Journals use SM to disseminate their papers and network with authors, and readers. Nowadays, passive dissemination is a poor strategy, according to Darling et al. (2013): twitter can present an echo chamber for dissemination, especially when a paper gets retweeted. About 40 % of twitter citations of papers occur within 1 week of publication, while half of them include a direct link to a resource (Priem and Costello 2010). Moreover, dissemination via SM can result in what Ogden (2013) calls ‘‘social-media facilitated peer review’’. Via twitter, papers can also reach people in decision making positions, while conference live tweeting might bring exposure of research to journalists. Some journals require authors to provide a tweetable abstract for their submission (Darling et al. 2013); furthermore, scientific societies have issued guidelines for citing SM (Roman 2014). T. Tonia (&) Institute of Social and Preventive Medicine, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland e-mail: ttonia@ispm.unibe.ch Int J Public Health (2014) 59:889–891 DOI 10.1007/s00038-014-0615-1" @default.
• W1967568093 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W1967568093 creator A5009217713 @default.
• W1967568093 date "2014-11-01" @default.
• W1967568093 modified "2023-10-14" @default.
• W1967568093 title "Social media in public health: is it used and is it useful?" @default.
• W1967568093 cites W1491754772 @default.
• W1967568093 cites W1965964177 @default.
• W1967568093 cites W1982826806 @default.
• W1967568093 cites W2041540760 @default.
• W1967568093 cites W2060979722 @default.
• W1967568093 cites W2115535574 @default.
• W1967568093 cites W2135498674 @default.
• W1967568093 cites W2156470732 @default.
• W1967568093 cites W2248593598 @default.
• W1967568093 cites W2614298075 @default.
• W1967568093 cites W4232223303 @default.
• W1967568093 doi "https://doi.org/10.1007/s00038-014-0615-1" @default.
• W1967568093 hasPubMedId "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25366520" @default.
• W1967568093 hasPublicationYear "2014" @default.
• W1967568093 type Work @default.
• W1967568093 sameAs 1967568093 @default.
• W1967568093 citedByCount "17" @default.
• W1967568093 countsByYear W19675680932016 @default.
• W1967568093 countsByYear W19675680932017 @default.
• W1967568093 countsByYear W19675680932018 @default.
• W1967568093 countsByYear W19675680932019 @default.
• W1967568093 countsByYear W19675680932020 @default.
• W1967568093 countsByYear W19675680932021 @default.
• W1967568093 countsByYear W19675680932022 @default.
• W1967568093 countsByYear W19675680932023 @default.
• W1967568093 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W1967568093 hasAuthorship W1967568093A5009217713 @default.
• W1967568093 hasBestOaLocation W19675680931 @default.
• W1967568093 hasConcept C136764020 @default.
• W1967568093 hasConcept C138816342 @default.
• W1967568093 hasConcept C159110408 @default.
• W1967568093 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
• W1967568093 hasConcept C39549134 @default.
• W1967568093 hasConcept C41008148 @default.
• W1967568093 hasConcept C518677369 @default.
• W1967568093 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W1967568093 hasConcept C99454951 @default.
• W1967568093 hasConceptScore W1967568093C136764020 @default.
• W1967568093 hasConceptScore W1967568093C138816342 @default.
• W1967568093 hasConceptScore W1967568093C159110408 @default.
• W1967568093 hasConceptScore W1967568093C17744445 @default.
• W1967568093 hasConceptScore W1967568093C39549134 @default.
• W1967568093 hasConceptScore W1967568093C41008148 @default.
• W1967568093 hasConceptScore W1967568093C518677369 @default.
• W1967568093 hasConceptScore W1967568093C71924100 @default.
• W1967568093 hasConceptScore W1967568093C99454951 @default.
• W1967568093 hasIssue "6" @default.
• W1967568093 hasLocation W19675680931 @default.
• W1967568093 hasLocation W19675680932 @default.
• W1967568093 hasLocation W19675680933 @default.
• W1967568093 hasLocation W19675680934 @default.
• W1967568093 hasOpenAccess W1967568093 @default.
• W1967568093 hasPrimaryLocation W19675680931 @default.
• W1967568093 hasRelatedWork W1475217987 @default.
• W1967568093 hasRelatedWork W2059080830 @default.
• W1967568093 hasRelatedWork W2075470855 @default.
• W1967568093 hasRelatedWork W2264872439 @default.
• W1967568093 hasRelatedWork W2348700340 @default.
• W1967568093 hasRelatedWork W2368556369 @default.
• W1967568093 hasRelatedWork W2394141121 @default.
• W1967568093 hasRelatedWork W2748952813 @default.
• W1967568093 hasRelatedWork W2899084033 @default.
• W1967568093 hasRelatedWork W3144681770 @default.
• W1967568093 hasVolume "59" @default.
• W1967568093 isParatext "false" @default.
• W1967568093 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W1967568093 magId "1967568093" @default.
• W1967568093 workType "article" @default.