Social media and the modern scientist: a research primer for low- and middle-income countries

Dong, Jihao; Saunders, Colleen; Wachira, Benjamin; Thoma, Brent; Chan, Teresa M.

doi:10.1016/j.afjem.2020.04.005

Cited by 26 publications

(21 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…As Brownson et al [71] explained, ineffective dissemination contributes to a gap between the discovery of public health knowledge and its application in both policy development and the daily lives of people. Dissemination efforts may miss opportunities to consider what research reaches journalists and how they, in turn, decide what is worthy of coverage for a particular audience.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For instance, scientists have recognized the value journalists offer in terms of citation advantage for studies mentioned in influential news publications [69,70]. They have also employed blogs and social media strategies for their research and scholarly practice (e.g., discourse, collaboration, recruitment), knowledge translation, dissemination, and education [71]. These strategies have often been visible to journalists and used to attract the attention of science journalists [72,73].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

What cancer research makes the news? A quantitative analysis of online news stories that mention cancer studies

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Journalists’ health and science reporting aid the public’s direct access to research through the inclusion of hyperlinks leading to original studies in peer-reviewed journals. While this effort supports the US-government mandate that research be made widely available, little is known about what research journalists share with the public. This cross-sectional exploratory study characterises US-government-funded research on cancer that appeared most frequently in news coverage and how that coverage varied by cancer type, disease incidence and mortality rates. The subject of analysis was 11436 research articles (published in 2016) on cancer funded by the US government and 642 news stories mentioning at least one of these articles. Based on Altmetric data, researchers identified articles via PubMed and characterised each based on the news media attention received online. Only 1.88% (n = 213) of research articles mentioning US government-funded cancer research included at least one mention in an online news publication. This is in contrast to previous research that found 16.8% (n = 1925) of articles received mention by online mass media publications. Of the 13 most common cancers in the US, 12 were the subject of at least one news mention; only urinary and bladder cancer received no mention. Traditional news sources included significantly more mentions of research on common cancers than digital native news sources. However, a general discrepancy exists between cancers prominent in news sources and those with the highest mortality rate. For instance, lung cancer accounted for the most deaths annually, while melanoma led to 56% less annual deaths; however, journalists cited research regarding these cancers nearly equally. Additionally, breast cancer received the greatest coverage per estimated annual death, while pancreatic cancer received the least coverage per death. Findings demonstrated a continued misalignment between prevalent cancers and cancers mentioned in online news media. Additionally, cancer control and prevention received less coverage from journalists than other cancer continuum stages, highlighting a continued underrepresentation of prevention-focused research. Results revealed a need for further scholarship regarding the role of journalists in research dissemination.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

What cancer research makes the news? A quantitative analysis of online news stories that mention cancer studies

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For example, in South Africa, the National Research Foundation (NRF) has implemented policies that encourage open access practices in publications and data in research that it funds (National Research Foundation, 2015). Recent research indicates that the use of social media in science communication is growing and can be used by researchers as a tool to spark discussions on the issues of interest (Dong et al, 2020;Mueller-Herbst et al, 2020). We assessed the use of social media to promote open science.…”

Section: Lack Of Policies and Incentives From The Government Local Funders And Institutionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Open Science in Kenya: Where Are We?

Mwangi

Mainye²,

Ouso

et al. 2021

Front. Res. Metr. Anal.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

According to the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), Open Science is the movement to make scientific research and data accessible to all. It has great potential for advancing science. At its core, it includes (but is not limited to) open access, open data, and open research. Some of the associated advantages are promoting collaboration, sharing and reproducibility in research, and preventing the reinvention of the wheel, thus saving resources. As research becomes more globalized and its output grows exponentially, especially in data, the need for open scientific research practices is more evident — the future of modern science. This has resulted in a concerted global interest in open science uptake. Even so, barriers still exist. The formal training curriculum in most, if not all, universities in Kenya does not equip students with the knowledge and tools to subsequently practice open science in their research. Therefore, to work openly and collaboratively, there is a need for awareness and training in the use of open science tools. These have been neglected, especially in most developing countries, and remain barriers to the cause. Moreover, there is scanty research on the state of affairs regarding the practice and/or adoption of open science. Thus, we developed, through the OpenScienceKE framework, a model to narrow the gap. A sensitize-train-hack-collaborate model was applied in Nairobi, the economic and administrative capital of Kenya. Using the model, we sensitized through seminars, trained on the use of tools through workshops, applied the skills learned in training through hackathons to collaboratively answer the question on the state of open science in Kenya. While the former parts of the model had 20–50 participants, the latter part mainly involved participants with a bioinformatics background, leveraging their advanced computational skills. This model resulted in an open resource that researchers can use to publish as open access cost-effectively. Moreover, we observed a growing interest in open science practices in Kenya through literature search and data mining and that lack of awareness and skills may still hinder the adoption and practice of open science. Furthermore, at the time of the analyses, we surprisingly found that out of the 20,069 papers downloaded from BioRXiv, only 18 had Kenyan authors, a majority of which are international (16) collaborations. This may suggest poor uptake of the use of preprints among Kenyan researchers. The findings in this study highlight the state of open science in Kenya and challenges facing its adoption and practice while bringing forth possible areas for primary consideration in the campaign toward open science. It also proposes a model (sensitize-train-hack-collaborate model) that may be adopted by researchers, funders and other proponents of open science to address some of the challenges faced in promoting its adoption in Kenya.

show abstract

“…Just like Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) terms of the National Library of Medicine of the US, hashtags may improve the retrieval of relevant items on SMPs [22]. The use of hashtags may also enable access to various professional online groups that share texts, graphics, and research data [23].…”

Section: Potential Solutionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Online research tools and platforms have gained a greater foothold in recent times. Online surveys, YouTube and Google trends-based studies are increasingly popular, and SoMe analytics and openaccess datasets are instrumental for collaborative research to tackle the COVID-19 pandemic [23,24]. SMPs are also a collaborative space to connect with peers and form alliances [23].…”

Section: Potential Solutionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Social Media for Scholarly Communication in Central Asia

Gaur

Gupta

2021

CAJMHE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Social Media Platforms (SMPs) have emerged as the new frontiers for academic engagement, more so during the pandemic. Cultural barriers, close censorship, and language restrictions may limit the participation of Central Asian scholars in the global scientific communication. This article explores the patterns of Social Media (SoMe) use in Central Asia and outlines probable deterrents of academic engagement in the region. Some suggestions are formulated to offer digital and socio-cultural solutions aimed to improve Central Asian scholars’ activities on SoMe platforms and bridge the divide for fruitful academic partnerships.

show abstract

Social media and the modern scientist: a research primer for low- and middle-income countries

Cited by 26 publications

References 31 publications

What cancer research makes the news? A quantitative analysis of online news stories that mention cancer studies

What cancer research makes the news? A quantitative analysis of online news stories that mention cancer studies

Open Science in Kenya: Where Are We?

Social Media for Scholarly Communication in Central Asia

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About