You are here

  • Home
  • Online First
  • Social media ambassadors and collaboration with OncoAlert: a European Network of Young Gynae Oncologists study of comparative Twitter analysis of #ESGO2021 and #ESGO2022

Article Text

Article menu

other Versions

Download PDFPDF
Original research
Social media ambassadors and collaboration with OncoAlert: a European Network of Young Gynae Oncologists study of comparative Twitter analysis of #ESGO2021 and #ESGO2022
  1. Esra Bilir1,2,3,
  2. Wasim Ahmed4,
  3. Joanna Kacperczyk-Bartnik5,
  4. Sara Nasser6,
  5. Pernille Bjerre Trent7,8,
  6. Felix Boria9,
  7. Irina Tsibulak10,
  8. Enrique Chacon11,
  9. Fabio Martinelli12,
  10. Aleksandra Natalia Strojna13,
  11. Gilberto Morgan14,15,
  12. Nicolò Bizzarri16,
  13. Ane Gerda Eriksson7 and
  14. Charalampos Theofanakis17
  1. 1Department of Gynecologic Oncology, Koc University School of Medicine, Istanbul, Turkey
  2. 2Department of Global Health, Koc University Graduate School of Health Sciences, Istanbul, Turkey
  3. 3Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Die Klinik in Preetz, Preetz, Germany
  4. 4Stirling University Management School, Stirling, UK
  5. 5II Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Medical University of Warsaw, Warsaw, Poland
  6. 6Department of Gynecology and Tumor Surgery, Charite Comprehensive Cancer Center, Berlin, Germany
  7. 7Department of Gynecologic Oncology, Division of Cancer Medicine, Oslo University Hospital, Norwegian Radium Hospital, Oslo, Norway
  8. 8Institute of Clinical Medicine, University of Oslo Faculty of Medicine, Oslo, Norway
  9. 9Gynecologic Unit, Clinica Universidad de Navarra, Madrid, Spain
  10. 10Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Medical University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria
  11. 11Gynecologic Oncology Unit, Universidad de Navarra, Pamplona, Spain
  12. 12Department of Gynecologic Oncology, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori di Milano, Milan, Italy
  13. 13Department of Gynecology and Gynecologic Oncology, Evangelische Kliniken Essen Mitte, Essen, Germany
  14. 14Department of Medical Oncology, Skåne University Hospital, Lund, Sweden
  15. 15OncoAlert Network
  16. 16UOC Ginecologia Oncologica, Dipartimento per la Salute della Donna e del Bambino e della Salute Pubblica, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Agostino Gemelli IRCCS, Rome, Italy
  17. 17Division of Gynaecological Oncology, 1st Department of Obstetrics & Gynaecology, Alexandra Hospital, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Athens, Greece
  1. Correspondence to Dr Joanna Kacperczyk-Bartnik, II Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Medical University of Warsaw, Warsaw 00-315, Poland; asiakacperczyk{at}gmail.com

Abstract

Objective The primary objective was to reveal the impact of social media ambassadors and the collaboration between the European Society of Gynaecological Oncology (ESGO) and the OncoAlert Network on Twitter during the ESGO 2022 Congress by comparing it with the ESGO 2021 Congress. We also aimed to share our experience on how to organize a social media ambassador program and evaluate the potential benefits for the society and the ambassadors.

Methods We defined the impact as promoting the congress, sharing the knowledge, change in follower count, and change in tweet, retweet, and reply counts. We used the Academic Track Twitter Application Programming Interface to retrieve data from ESGO 2021 and ESGO 2022. We used the keywords of ESGO2021 and ESGO2022 to retrieve data for each of the conferences. The time range in our study captured interactions from before, during, and after conferences. We collected the ambassadors’, ESGO’s, and the European Network of Young Gynae Oncologists’ (ENYGO’s) follower data on Twitter from November 2021 to November 2022 for comparative analysis.

Results There was a 7.23-fold increase in the use of the official congress hashtag in 2022 compared with 2021. Compared with #ESGO2021 data, the main interventions of the Social Media Ambassadors and OncoAlert partnership determined 7.79-, 17.36-, 5.50-, 10.58-, and 8.50-fold increases with #ESGO2022 data in the mentions, mentions in retweet, tweet, retweet, and replies, respectively. Similarly, all other most commonly used hashtags in the top 10 list indicated a range from 2.56- to 7.00-fold increase. Compared to the ESGO 2021 congress month, ESGO and the majority (83.3%, n=5) of ambassadors gained more followers during ESGO 2022 congress month.

Conclusions An official social media ambassadors program and collaboration with influential accounts in the field of interest are beneficial for congress-related engagement on a social media platform (Twitter). Individuals participating in the program can also benefit from gaining higher visibility among specific audience.

  • carcinoma

Data availability statement

Data are available upon reasonable request.

https://doi.org/10.1136/ijgc-2023-004371

Statistics from Altmetric.com

    Request Permissions

    If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

    Data availability statement

    Data are available upon reasonable request.

    View Full Text

    Footnotes

    • Twitter @esragbilir, @Joanna86992517, @dr_saranasser, @pbjerretrent, @BoriaFelix, @Quique_ChC, @DrFMartinelli, @aStrojnaMD, @agz_eriksson

    • Contributors EB: study concept, study plan, data interpretation, preparation of the manuscript draft, guarantor. WA: data analysis, data interpretation, administrative works. JK-B: study concept, preparation of the manuscript draft. SN: data collection, critical review of the manuscript. PBT: data collection, critical review of the manuscript. FB: data collection, critical review of the manuscript. IT: data collection, critical review of the manuscript. EC: data collection, critical review of the manuscript. FM: data collection, critical review of the manuscript. ANS: data collection, critical review of the manuscript. GM: data collection, critical review of the manuscript. NB: data collection, critical review of the manuscript. AGE: data collection, critical review of the manuscript, project supervision. CT: data collection, critical review of the manuscript, project supervision.

    • Funding The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.

    • Competing interests None declared.

    • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

    • Supplemental material This content has been supplied by the author(s). It has not been vetted by BMJ Publishing Group Limited (BMJ) and may not have been peer-reviewed. Any opinions or recommendations discussed are solely those of the author(s) and are not endorsed by BMJ. BMJ disclaims all liability and responsibility arising from any reliance placed on the content. Where the content includes any translated material, BMJ does not warrant the accuracy and reliability of the translations (including but not limited to local regulations, clinical guidelines, terminology, drug names and drug dosages), and is not responsible for any error and/or omissions arising from translation and adaptation or otherwise.