Online and Social Media Presence (Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and YouTube) of Civil Associations, Mutual Associations, and Foundations in Argentine Nursing
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.56294/mr202213Keywords:
Nursing, Social Networks, Scientific Societies, Web, Social ImpactAbstract
Social media has experienced an unprecedented boom in recent years and its impact on today's society is undeniable. Social media has changed the way people communicate, relate and inform themselves. In the academic world, social media has also acquired great relevance, especially in the field of scientific societies. This article aims to analyze the presence of Argentine organizations in the field of nursing on social media. The study included a list of Argentine organizations in the field of nursing obtained from official databases at Ministerio de Justicia y Derechos Humanos. Those organizations (Civil Associations, Mutual Association, and Foundations) whose keywords were related to nursing were selected. 95 organizations in the nursing field were registered, of which only 24 (25,2 %) had a website accessible from the internet. 95 organizations in the nursing field were registered, of which only 24 (25,2 %) had a website accessible from the internet. Only 39 organizations had a presence on at least 1 social network. The results of the study revealed that there is a low presence of these organizations on social media, with only a small percentage having profiles on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and YouTube. Additionally, these organizations had a low number of followers on their social media profiles. This highlights the need for these organizations to enhance their social media strategies to increase their visibility, impact, and engagement with their audience. Improving their social media presence can also help these organizations to better promote their research, knowledge, and scientific developments, thus contributing to the advancement of the nursing field.
References
1. Di Minin E, Tenkanen H, Toivonen T. Prospects and challenges for social media data in conservation science. Front Environ Sci 2015;3:63. https://doi.org/10.3389/fenvs.2015.00063.
2. Toivonen T, Heikinheimo V, Fink C, Hausmann A, Hiippala T, Järv O, et al. Social media data for conservation science: A methodological overview. Biol Conserv 2019;233:298-315. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2019.01.023.
3. Ranschaert ER, van Ooijen PMA, Lee S, Ratib O, Parizel PM. Social media for radiologists: an introduction. Insights Imaging 2015;6:741-52. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13244-015-0430-0.
4. Hargittai E, Füchslin T, Schäfer MS. How Do Young Adults Engage With Science and Research on Social Media? Some Preliminary Findings and an Agenda for Future Research. Soc Media Soc 2018;4:2056305118797720. https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305118797720.
5. Bautista-Puig N, De Filippo D, Mauleón E, Sanz-Casado E. Scientific Landscape of Citizen Science Publications: Dynamics, Content and Presence in Social Media. Publications 2019;7:12. https://doi.org/10.3390/publications7010012.
6. Vidal-Perez R, Gómez de Diego JJ, Grapsa J, Fontes-Carvalho R, Gonzalez-Juanatey JR. Social media in cardiology: Reasons to learn how to use it. World J Cardiol 2019;11:217-20. https://doi.org/10.4330/wjc.v11.i10.217.
7. Portal de Datos Abiertos de la Justicia Argentina. Portal Datos Abiertos Justicia Argent s. f. http://datos.jus.gob.ar (accedido 8 de marzo de 2023).
8. Park J-S, Lee J-H, Woo H-J. Mobile Video Telephony Service Adoption : A Value-based Approach. J Inf Technol Appl Manag 2010;17:111-32.
9. Lin K-Y, Lu H-P. Why people use social networking sites: An empirical study integrating network externalities and motivation theory. Comput Hum Behav 2011;27:1152-61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2010.12.009.
10. France SL, Vaghefi MS, Kazandjian B. Who Owns the Data? A Systematic Review at the Boundary of Information Systems and Marketing 2021. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2107.14019.
11. Eysenbach G. Medicine 2.0: Social Networking, Collaboration, Participation, Apomediation, and Openness. J Med Internet Res 2008;10:e1030. https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.1030.
12. Moorhead SA, Hazlett DE, Harrison L, Carroll JK, Irwin A, Hoving C. A New Dimension of Health Care: Systematic Review of the Uses, Benefits, and Limitations of Social Media for Health Communication. J Med Internet Res 2013;15:e1933. https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.1933.
13. Thelwall M, Haustein S, Larivière V, Sugimoto CR. Do Altmetrics Work? Twitter and Ten Other Social Web Services. PLOS ONE 2013;8:e64841. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0064841.
14. Ke Q, Ahn Y-Y, Sugimoto CR. A systematic identification and analysis of scientists on Twitter. PLOS ONE 2017;12:e0175368. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0175368.
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2022 Carlos Oscar Lepez, Patricia Alonso Galbán, Carlos Canova-Barrios, Felipe Machuca-Contreras (Author)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
The article is distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License. Unless otherwise stated, associated published material is distributed under the same licence.
