I think the issue is somewhat circular (for now) - which came first: twitter followers or prominence in academia? For now, I would guess that it is the later. I would also say that an r^2 of 0.12 is virtually meaningless. Yes, statistically significant but not scientifically significant. If people thought this was a great or interesting result it would have ended up in the red or white journals - which I would be it was submitted to and summarily rejected from. Still a fun read.
I would also say that this is no different that prior people in "organized neurosurgery" who were neither good clinicians nor successful scientists. There will always be people that play the game because they think that's important.
The title of the paper is: "The top 100 social media influencers in neurosurgery on Twitter."
And the authors say that the social media factor should be considered when making hiring decisions and appointments.
This is not a satirical publication, mind you.
Seems like neurosurgery is going to shit.
also, most of this twitter posting is just social justice virtual signaling from over-privileged academics. the future of neurosurgery is BLEAK
Am I missing something? What is the innovation being provided via Twitter posts?
Posts: 682
Threads: 2
Joined: Dec 2016
Reputation:
6
Fwiw we are talking about people with a few thousand followers. Something to build on but certainly not a patient magnet.
It seems like a good way to connect professionally but I doubt it would be something they got you that key job. Used improperly, of course, it could knock you out of a job!
I see these M3s “introducing” themselves on Twitter and I’m enraged tbh lol. Going to remember them in a bad way.