#FollowFriday #FF the EBM-Skeptics @cochranecollab @EvidenceMatters @oracknows @ACPinternists

27 11 2009

FollowFriday is a twitter tradition in which twitter users recommend other users to follow (on Friday) by twittering their name(s), the hashtags #FF or #FollowFriday, and the reason for their recommendation(s).

Since the roll out of Twitter lists I add the #FollowFriday Recommendations to a (semi-)permanent #FollowFriday Twitter list: @laikas/followfridays-ff

This week I have added 4 people to the #FollowFriday list who are all twittering about EBM and/or are skeptics and/or belong to the Cochrane Collaboration. Since there are many interesting people in this field, I also made a separate Twitterlist: @laikas/ebm-cochrane-sceptics

The following people are added to both my #followfridays-ff (n=36) and ebm-cochrane-sceptics (n=46) lists. If you are on twitter you can follow these lists.
I’m sure I forgot somebody. If I did, let me know and I’ll see if I include that person.

All 4 tweople have twittered about the new and much discussed breast cancer screening guidelines.

  1. @ACPinternists* is the Communications Department of the American College of Physicians (ACP). I know ACP from the ACP-Journal club with its excellent critical appraised topics, in a section of the well known Annals of Internal Medicine. The uproar over the new U.S. breast cancer screening guidelines started with the publication of 3 articles in Ann Intern Med.
    *Mmm, when I come to think of it, shouldn’t @ACPinternists be added to the biomedical journals Twitter lists as well?
  2. @EvidenceMatters is really an invaluable tweeter with a high output of many different kinds of tweets, often (no surprise) related to Evidence Based Medicine. He (?) is very inspiring. My post “screening can’t hurt, can it” was inspired by one of his tweets.
  3. @cochranecollab stands for the Cochrane Collaboration. Like @acpinternists the tweets are mostly unidirectional, but provide interesting information related to EBM and/or the Cochrane Collaboration. Disclosure: I’m not entirely neutral.
  4. @oracknows. Who doesn’t know Orac? Orac is “a (not so) humble pseudonymous surgeon/scientist with an ego just big enough to delude himself that someone might actually care about his miscellaneous”. His tweets are valuable because of his high quality posts on his blog Respectful Insolence: Orac mostly uses Twitter as a publication platform. I really can recommend his excellent explanation of the new breast cancer guidelines.

You may also want to read:

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]




Laika’s #FollowFriday #FF Twitter List

13 11 2009

In my post Twitter’s #FollowFriday #FF – Over the Top. Literally I explained what Twitter’s FollowFriday or FF means, how this Twitter meme started and how FollowFriday should and shouldn’t be used.

In short, FollowFriday is a way to recommend a few people to your Twitter-followers. For at least 2 reasons: to acknowledge those favorite tweeters and make it easier for your followers to find new interesting people.

However, many people don’t use the FollowFriday correctly. For instance, they spend several tweets just mentioning dozens of @people and they repeat the tweets (retweet) about each recommendation they get @themselves. That is annoying for people seeing these tweets appearing in their timeline.

In this FollowFriday post I suggested some Twitter Etiquette Rules as well as some alternatives for the FollowFriday approach.

Now there is another alternative, which can either be used alone or as an adjunct to the normal FollowFriday-tweets:

Twitterlists!

The Twitter List feature is designed to make following and suggesting groups of tweeters easier. Everyone on Twitter can create up to 20 lists with a maximum of 500 Twitter people each. Others can follow these lists as well. So instead of FollowFridays you could construct lists of your favorite Twitter people for others to follow. There is one disadvantage of this approach: context is lost. You can only put people on a list without any further explanation why. Of course, you can create separate lists of categories of people, in my case librarians, doctors and funny people for instance, so others have an idea what to expect.

Some people think Twitterlists make FollowFridays obsolete. However Twitterlists and FollowFridays could reinforce each other. At least that’s what I will try using the following approach.

I will construct a FollowFriday Twitter list on basis of my FollowFriday-tweets. They provide the context. Because Tweets get lost, I will gather those tweets on a separate page, so you can always find my elaborated FF-recommendations there.

For Twitter-newcomers, who know me, but find it difficult to find interesting people to follow, this may be a useful starting point.

In selective cases I also plan to write a #FF post to put someone in the limelight. I intend to do the same with bloggers.

By the way I only include people with useful tweets on the lists, so people with great blogs but with not so interesting or very infrequent tweets won’t be included.
As time goes, I may also prune the list, because the number or quality of the tweets or my preference may change.

What is a good tweet? That is personal, but I think that people should be original, helpful, social and up to date and provide good information (with links) .

When you’re on Twitter you like you can follow my FF-list here:
http://twitter.com/laikas/followfridays-ff/

The Following people are included on my FF-list (listed chronologically according my tweet-timeline)
** means that I often have a chitchat or social talk with that person and/or that he/she is very helpful).

  1. @allergynotes , currently @drves (doctor, immunology, health 2.0, **) 2x
  2. @berci (doctor, scientist, **)
  3. @conorato (health 2.0)
  4. @shamsha (medlib, **)    3x
  5. @amcunningam (doctor, education, skeptic, **)  2x
  6. @pudliszek (medlib, **) 2x
  7. @eagledawg (medlib, **)  2x
  8. @pfanderson (medlib, geek, **)
  9. @digicmb (medlib, geek, NL, **)  2x
  10. @sarchet62 (lib, med. anthropologist, geek)
  11. @dreamingspires (publishing, Aussie, **)
  12. @staticnrg (survivor, health 2.0, science, **)
  13. @bonnycastle (education, **)
  14. @andrewspong (publishing, skeptic)
  15. @DrShock (doctor, psychi, NL, **)
  16. @aarontay (lib, geek)
  17. @MarilynMann (science, cancer survivor, lawyer, skeptic, pharma)
    Following tweets could not be traced back:
  18. @flutesUD (scientist, PhD-student, **)
  19. @palmdoc (doctor, geek)
  20. @doctorblogs (doctor, EBM, health 2.0)
  21. @bgaustin (EBM)
  22. @northerndoctor (doctor, GP, EBM, Skeptic)
  23. @Blue_Wode (EBM, Skeptic)
  24. @precordialthump (doctor, ICU, Aussie, **)
  25. @sandnsurf (doctor, ICU, Aussie, **)
  26. @bitethedust (Remote Pharmacist, Aussie, Art, **)
  27. @giustini (medlib, web 2.0)
  28. @jstaaks (lib, psycho, UBA, bieptweet, NL, **)
  29. @ENTHouse (doc, ENT, **)

Based on the Next #FollowFriday recommendations (as far as I could trace them back):





Twitter Lists of Medical and other Scientific Journals

6 11 2009

In the previous two posts (“Biomedical Journals on Twitter” and List(s) of Tweeting Journals: Your Votes Please!) I introduced the Google-spreadsheet of (Bio-)medical Journals, manually compiled by the concerted effort of many people on Twitter. At a certain point other non-biomedical scientific journals were added, which made the list more complete, but less useful for most health care people, for whom the list was designed. In the last post I therefore asked people whether they preferred one complete list (as it was), one lists with different tabs for each discipline or different spreadsheets.

The results of the poll:

5-11-2009 17-51-47 results poll

Twenty-seven people responded. Although this is a small sample, it is clear that people either preferred one separate medical or biomedical list (30% and 26%) or one spreadsheet with all types of journals on separate tabs (33%). There was little or no interest in separate lists or all journals on one lists (without separation in tabs).

Discussion about the design of the spreadsheet has become somewhat superfluous by the recent roll out of Twitter Lists. The Twitter List feature is designed to make following and suggesting groups of tweeters easier. Everyone on Twitter can make up 20 lists of maximal 500 Twitter/people each. On the web you can easily add each account you like to your lists.

I have created 3 Twitter Journal List. In line with the outcome of the poll, I made  completely overlapping sets, where the Medical journal set is part of the Biomedical journal set, which belongs to the All/Science set.

If you’re on Twitter you can follow these three journal lists:

The spreadsheet still forms the basis. You can make adjustments here and if you mark them (color) or let me know, I will include them in the Twitter lists.
Found any new journals/magazines? Please feel free to add them.

If you’re interested in following (bio-)medical and/or scientific journals you can follow the list(s) you want, or your own selection from the journals in the lists.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]







Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 611 other followers