This is the Scientific Surgery Archive, which contains all randomized clinical trials in surgery that have been identified by searching the top 50 English language medical journal issues since January 1998. Compiled by Jonothan J. Earnshaw, former Editor-in-Chief, BJS
Randomized controlled trial of plain English and visual abstracts for disseminating surgical research via social media.
Published: 2nd October 2019
Authors: S. J. Chapman, R. C. Grossman, M. E. B. FitzPatrick, R. R. W. Brady
Background
Patients are increasingly taking an active role in the design and delivery of surgical research. Public communication of results should also be encouraged, but this is often limited to non‐expert commentary. This study assessed the role of plain English abstracts disseminated via social media in engaging patients and clinicians in the communication of surgical research.
Method
A three‐arm randomized controlled trial with crossover of two intervention arms was performed. Manuscripts accepted for publication in BJS were allocated to one of three arms and disseminated via Twitter: plain English abstracts, visual abstracts and standard tweets. The primary outcome was online engagement (a composite of tweets, replies and likes) by members of the public within 14 days. The secondary outcome was online engagement by healthcare professionals.
Results
Forty‐one manuscripts were randomized to plain English abstracts (14), visual abstracts (14) and standard tweets (13). The number of public engagements was low, with a mean of 1·8 (range 0–8), 2·5 (0–11), and 1·2 (0–4) for plain English abstracts, visual abstracts and standard tweets respectively. The mean number of engagements by healthcare professionals was 29·4 (6–66), 45·3 (6–161) and 28·8 (10–52) respectively. Overall, visual abstracts attracted a significantly greater number of engagements than plain English ones (P < 0·001).
Conclusion
Online, public engagement with surgical research was low. Overall engagement (predominantly from healthcare professionals) was enhanced by the use of visual abstracts.
Full textYou may also be interested in
Leading article
Authors: C. Chamberlain, J. M. Blazeby
Systematic review
Authors: H. K. James, A. W. Chapman, G. T. R. Pattison, D. R. Griffin, J. D. Fisher
Systematic review
Authors: J. H. H. Olsen, S. Öberg, K. Andresen, T. W. Klausen, J. Rosenberg
Original article
Authors: L. Heylen, J. Pirenne, U. Samuel, I. Tieken, M. Coemans, M. Naesens et al.
Original article
Authors: L. Cairncross, H. A. Snow, D. C. Strauss, M. J. F. Smith, O. Sjokvist, C. Messiou et al.
Original article
Authors: R. J. Dinsdale, J. Hazeldine, K. Al Tarrah, P. Hampson, A. Devi, C. Ermogenous et al.
Original article
Authors: C. A. Sewalt, E. Venema, E. J. A. Wiegers, F. E. Lecky, S. C. E. Schuit, D. den Hartog et al.
Article
Authors: A. M Lacy, R. Bravo, A. M. Otero‐Piñeiro, R. Pena, F. B. De Lacy, R. Menchaca et al.
Original article
Authors: P. Ghorbani, T. Troëng, O. Brattström, K. G. Ringdal, T. Eken, A. Ekbom et al.
Original article
Authors: E. H. Wright, M. Tyler, B. Vojnovic, J. Pleat, A. Harris, D. Furniss et al.
Original article
Authors: N. Patel, R. J. Egan, B. R. Carter, D. M. Scott‐Coombes, M. J. Stechman, A. Afzaal et al.
Leading article
Authors: M. Di Paolo, U. Boggi, E. Turillazzi