ISSN: 2161-0711

Medicina comunitaria y educación para la salud

Acceso abierto

Nuestro grupo organiza más de 3000 Series de conferencias Eventos cada año en EE. UU., Europa y América. Asia con el apoyo de 1.000 sociedades científicas más y publica más de 700 Acceso abierto Revistas que contienen más de 50.000 personalidades eminentes, científicos de renombre como miembros del consejo editorial.

Revistas de acceso abierto que ganan más lectores y citas
700 revistas y 15 000 000 de lectores Cada revista obtiene más de 25 000 lectores

Indexado en
  • Índice Copérnico
  • Google Académico
  • sherpa romeo
  • Revista GenámicaBuscar
  • SeguridadIluminado
  • Búsqueda de referencia
  • Universidad Hamdard
  • EBSCO AZ
  • OCLC-WorldCat
  • publones
  • Fundación de Ginebra para la educación y la investigación médicas
  • Pub Europeo
  • ICMJE
Comparte esta página

Abstracto

What the Tweets Say: Understanding the Connectivity between Health Development Agencies

Carrie B. Dolan, Tanner Shane and Sarah Siebes

The primary goal of this work was to determine how seven major development, agencies are engaging with users on Twitter. The sample included 11,441 Twitter users that seven development agencies were following in December 2018. We used Social Network Analysis (SNA) to analyze connectivity, interaction, and influence. Out of the 11,441 users followed by donors a fifth of the users are followed by more than one donor indicating that these 2,272 users could have been purposefully selected based on their influence in global health or more broadly development. In addition, major development agencies are following different user accounts. In comparing the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and the United Nations they follow different accounts about 98% of the time. When using Twitter for information it is important for policymakers to consider multiple Twitter feeds for information. A limited online perspective could shape policy discussions-even if it isn’t recognized as the primary source of information by leaving the impression that the reader has a broader understanding of the online content than is true.