Objective: Since 1998, JAMA has published peer-reviewed Patient Pages to help healthcare professionals (HCPs) promote credible information to patients. With patient empowerment and social media, the public, rather than HCPs, may be the primary promotors of such publications. Publication professionals are becoming more involved in patient-centric publications and should know who engages with such publications. We investigated engagement with JAMA’s Patient Pages, based on Twitter activity. Research design and methods: For this controlled cross-sectional analysis, sequential (November 2013-November 2015; n = 86) free-access JAMA Patient Pages were matched for topic and time to JAMA articles (controlling for journal; n = 86) and to free-access, MEDLINE-listed articles (controlling for access; n = 86). Altmetric and Twitter data were analyzed by an independent academic statistician. Results: For each of the 3 publication types, the median number of tweets was significantly higher for the public compared with HCPs: Patient Pages (34 vs 8; P50.001); JAMA articles (28 vs 9; P50.001); MEDLINE articles (1 vs 0; P = 0.002). The median number of tweeters, median number of followers, median Altmetric scores, and percent of articles having the US as the top tweeting country were significantly higher for Patient Pages (49; 226,720; 35; 93%) and JAMA articles (47; 214,773; 42; 88%) compared with MEDLINE articles (1; 183; 1; 23%); for each outcome, the difference between Patient Pages or JAMA articles vs MEDLINE was P50.001; no significant differences were detected between Patient Pages vs JAMA articles. Conclusions: Members of the public can be more powerful promoters of peerreviewed publications, whether patient-centric or not, than HCPs. Tweeters from the US were the strongest promoters of JAMA’s patient-centric, peer-reviewed publications.
12th Annual Meeting of International Society for Medical Publication Professionals (ISMPP), National Harbour, United States 11-13 April 2016
Current Medical Research and Opinion / Vol. 32, Supplement 1, pp.S14-S15