Background: Recent studies suggest that female researchers are less visible on social media. The objective of this observational work was to compare the use of professional social networks between male and female anaesthesia researchers. Methods: Among four anaesthesia journals, we analysed the first/last authors (FA/LA) of the most frequently cited articles in 2016e2017 and the authors who published more than one article per year between 2013 and 2018 (prolific authors). We compared the use of the professional social networks Twitter, LinkedIn, and ResearchGate by the selected authors and analysed the proportion of women in FA and LA position. The variables are presented as median (interquartile range). Results: The analysis included 260 FA, 232 LA, and 297 prolific authors. Despite similar declared skills and number of citations, women had lower scientific reputation scores on ResearchGate (RG score: 32.0 [24.4e41.1] vs 20.3 [15.1e29.2]; P<0.0001 in the FA group; 39.3 [34.3e43.4] vs 35.7 [30.3e39.5], P<0.01 in the LA group; and 41.5 [35.6e45.7] vs 36.8 [28.1e42.7], P<0.01 in the prolific group).In all groups, women were significantly less followed on ResearchGate than men. In the three groups, the Twitter (22.7%, 25.0%, and 23.6%, respectively) and LinkedIn (59.2%, 56.5%, and 62.3%, respectively) usage rate were similar with no difference between men and women in each group. Of the 260 articles included, 94 (36.2%) manuscripts had female FA, whereas 41 (15.8%) had female LA. Conclusion:In anaesthesia, the visibility of female researchers on the social network dedicated to scientific research is lower than that of male researchers.

No abstract

Background Social networks are now essential tools for promoting research and researchers. However, there is no study investigating the link between presence or not on professional social networks and scientific publication or citation for a given researcher. Objective The objective of this study was to study the link between professional presence on social networks and scientific publications/citations among anesthesia researchers. Methods We included all the French full professors and associate professors of anesthesia. We analyzed their presence on the social networks Twitter (professional account with ≥1 tweet over the 6 previous months) and ResearchGate. We extracted their bibliometric parameters for the 2016-2020 period via the Web of Science Core Collection (Clarivate Analytics) database in the Science Citation Index-Expanded index. Results A total of 162 researchers were analyzed; 42 (25.9%) had an active Twitter account and 110 (67.9%) a ResearchGate account. There was no difference between associate professors and full professors regarding active presence on Twitter (8/23 [35%] vs. 34/139 [24.5%], respectively; P=.31) or ResearchGate (15/23 [65%] vs. 95/139 [68.3%], respectively; P=.81). Researchers with an active Twitter account (median [IQR]) had more scientific publications (45 [28-61] vs. 26 [12-41]; P<.001), a higher h-index (12 [8-16] vs. 8 [5-11]; P<.001), a higher number of citations per publication (12.54 [9.65-21.8] vs. 10.63 [5.67-16.10]; P=.01), and a higher number of citations (563 [321-896] vs. 263 [105-484]; P<.001). Researchers with a ResearchGate account (median [IQR]) had more scientific publications (33 [17-47] vs. 26 [9-43]; P=.03) and a higher h-index (9 [6-13] vs. 8 [3-11]; P=.03). There was no difference between researchers with a ResearchGate account and those without it concerning the number of citations per publication and overall number of citations. In multivariate analysis including sex, academic status, and presence on social networks, the presence on Twitter was associated with the number of publications (β=20.2; P<.001), the number of citations (β=494.5; P<.001), and the h-index (β=4.5; P<.001). Conclusions Among French anesthesia researchers, an active presence on Twitter is associated with higher scientific publication and citations.

Introduction: Endoplasmic reticulum stress (ERS) is involved in inflammatory organ failure. Our objective was to describe ERS, its unfolded protein response (UPR) expression/kinetics during cardiac surgery with cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) and its association with postoperative organ failure (OF).Methods: Prospective study conducted on patients undergoing cardiac surgery with CPB. Blood samples were taken before (Pre-CPB), 2 h (H2-CPB) and 24 h (H24-CPB) after CPB. Plasma levels of 78 kDa Glucose- Regulated Protein (GRP78, final effector of UPR) were evaluated by ELISA. The expression of genes coding for key elements of UPR (ATF6, ATF4, sXBP1, CHOP) was evaluated by quantitative PCR performed on total blood. OF was defined as invasive mechanical ventilation and/or acute kidney injury and/or hemodynamic failure requiring catecholamines.Results: We included 46 patients, GRP78 was decreased at H2-CPB [1,328 (878–1,730) ng/ml vs. 2,348 (1,655–3,730) ng/ml Pre-CPB; p &lt; 0.001] but returned to basal levels at H24-CPB [2,068 (1,436–3,005) ng/ml]. The genes involved in UPR had increased expression at H2 and H24. GRP78 plasma levels in patients with OF at H24-CPB (n = 10) remained below Pre-CPB levels [−27.6 (−51.5; −24.2)%] compared to patients without OF (n = 36) in whom GRP78 levels returned to basal levels [0.6 (−28.1; 26.6)%; p &lt; 0.01]. H24-CPB ATF6 and CHOP expressions were lower in patients with OF than in patients without OF [2.3 (1.3–3.1) vs. 3.0 (2.7–3.7), p &lt; 0.05 and 1.3 (0.9–2.0) vs. 2.2 (1.7–2.9), p &lt; 0.05, respectively].Conclusions: Low relative levels of GRP78 and weak UPR gene expression appeared associated with postoperative OF. Further studies are needed to understand ERS implication during acute organ failure in humans.