ObjectiveTo assess the emerging use of Twitter by urological journals. MethodsA search of the Journal of Citation Reports 2012 was performed to identify urological journals. These journals were then searched on Twitter.com. Each journal website was accessed for links to social media (SoMe). The number of 'tweets' , followers and age of profile was determined. To evaluate the content, over a 6-month period (November 2013 to April 2014), all tweets were scrutinised on the journals Twitter profiles. To assess SoMe influence, the Klout score of each journal was also calculated. ResultsIn all, 33 urological journals were identified. Eight ConclusionSoMe is increasingly becoming an adjunct to traditional teaching methods, due to its convenient and user-friendly platform. Recently, many of the leading urological journals have used Twitter to highlight significant articles of interest to readers.

No abstract

The quality of videos on YouTube regarding male UC is widely variable. Preselected videos are deemed useful by junior doctors regarding male UC and can be used as an educational adjunct before performing hands-on tasks.

Background: In this paper, we identify and analyze the top 100 cited articles in urology since 1965 and assess changes in the top 100 since 2007.Methods: We selected highest impact journals in both urological and general medicine journals from the 2011 edition of Journal Citation Reports: Science edition. We identified and analyzed the 100 most cited articles using the Science Citation Index Expanded (1965-present).Results: The top 100 articles were cited a mean of 892 times (range: 529-2088) and published between 1966 and 2009, with 21 published since 2000. In 2012, 19 new articles appeared in the updated top 100 cited articles. Also, 16 journals were represented, led by the New England Journal of Medicine (n=36), the Journal of Urology (n=16) and the Lancet (n=12). In total, 81 articles were published from North America (USA=77, Canada=4). From the United States, the following institutes were among the top 5 represented: Johns Hopkins University (n=12), Harvard University, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Centre, National Institute of Health and Washington University (all 5). Only one institute outside the United States published more than one article in the top 100 (Institut Gustave Roussy, France). Nine urologists were first authors of 2 or more articles. Oncology (n=54) and transplantation (n=22) were the most common subspecialties represented.Conclusion: It is important to acknowledge the top cited articles as they mark key topics and advances in urology. There has been a 19% change in the top 100 cited articles in the past 5 years. Oncology and transplantation remain the most highly cited topics.

The top articles based on Altmetric scores were not highly cited, suggesting that publications receiving the most media attention may not be the most scientifically rigorous, or that this audience places greater value on different subjects than the scientific community.

No abstract

No abstract

IntroductionWith the advent of social media, healthcare professionals not only need to be conscious of professionalism in their face‐to‐face interactions but also in the electronic environment. The aim of this study was to assess the level of online professionalism on Facebook profiles available for public viewing of students from a dental school.Materials and methodsA search was performed via a new Facebook account of all students in the University Dental School (dental hygiene, dental nursing, dental science and dental technology). Profiles were categorised as ‘private’ or ‘public’. Demographic details and photographs/comments of unprofessional behaviour were recorded for each individual Facebook profile. Each profile was subsequently scored with regard to professionalism based on a previously published score.ResultsThere are a total of 287 students in the dental school. Of these, 62% (n = 177) had a Facebook account. Three per cent (n = 6) had a public account (fully accessible) whilst 97% (n = 171) had a private account (limited access); 36% (n = 63) of students mentioned the dental school/hospital on their profile; 34% (n = 60) had questionable content on their profile whilst 3% (n = 6) had definite violations of professionalism on their profile; and 25% (n = 44) had unprofessional photographs on their profile. Of those with unprofessional content, 52% (n = 23) of these had a documented affiliation with the dental school also visible on their profile.ConclusionThere was a concerning level of unprofessional content visible on students’ Facebook profiles. Students need to be fully aware of their professional responsibility in the setting of social media.