Received: 28 December 2023
- -
Revised: 15 February 2024
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rpth.2024.102387
RESEARCH LETTER
Accepted: 16 February 2024
Can scientific journals benefit from a social media presence?
An analysis of online traffic data and author perspectives
KEYWORDS
information dissemination, journal impact factor, social media
Social media platforms offer a unique opportunity for scientific liter-
ature to reach a large audience. Rather than requiring an individual to
search for the terms that lead to a piece of scientific work, social
media allows scientists and journals to actively disseminate their work
to a large network. This allows instantaneous promotion of scientific
work to a large audience and promotes dissemination, discussion, and
collaboration. In 2017, it was estimated that 1% to 5% of the 187
million active users on X (formerly Twitter) were active scientists [1].
Journal engagement in social media is on the rise. A recent study
demonstrated that as of early 2022, 25.2% of all journals listed in Web
of Science’s 3 major indices had a dedicated presence on X [2]. This
represented a substantial percentage increase from just 0.1% in 2007,
which continued to grow, reaching 2.9% in 2010, 11.8% in 2015, and
22.8% in 2020. These findings underscore a swiftly and continuously
expanding overlap between social media and scholarly communica-
tion, highlighting the growing significance of digital platforms in
disseminating scientific information.
Social media engagement has been shown to correlate with
citation rates, and a single randomized controlled study found that
tweeted articles achieved higher change in citation number in 1 year
as compared with nontweeted articles [3]. Both Research and Practice
in Thrombosis and Haemostasis (RPTH) and Journal of Thrombosis
and Haemostasis (JTH), the journals of the International Society on
Thrombosis and Haemostasis (ISTH), maintain an active social media
presence. Both journals actively promote every published article
through social media channels [4,5]. ISTH has recognized the impor-
tance of social media for dissemination of science, starting the X ac-
counts for both journals in 2016. Additionally, JTH started a presence
on LinkedIn in 2022. While there is increasing data supporting the role
of social media in scientific publication, there remains a paucity of data
related to the impact on authors. This study aims to investigate author
perspectives on the use of social media for promotion of their unique
scientific work, as well as the amount of traffic generated to the RPTH
and JTH websites via social media.
In May 2023, we created a survey using Alchemer that was emailed
to all corresponding authors who have previously published work with
RPTH or JTH. It was designed to be brief (approximately 5 minutes).
© 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Inc. on behalf of International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis. This is an open access article under the CC BY
license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Res Pract Thromb Haemost. 2024;8:e102387
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rpth.2024.102387
The survey contained multiple choice and Likert scale questions to
determine the effect the journals’ social media presence had on the
authors’ choice of publications. The survey was then emailed to a group
of corresponding authors from RPTH and JTH. A follow-up email was
sent a week later. The email contained a brief description of the goals of
the survey as well as some information on the benefits of a paper being
posted on social media to increase citation numbers. Survey answers
were collected through Alchemer. The online traffic to the RPTH and
JTH websites was measured by Elsevier using Adobe Analytics. The
data measured referring domains for all visits to the websites from
January 1, 2023, through December 31, 2023.
Out of 1195 survey recipients, a total of 115 completed the
survey (response rate of 9.6%). The full survey results are shown in
the Supplementary material. The social media platform most actively
used by our respondents was X (55.8%), followed by LinkedIn (46%)
and Facebook (31.9%). Out of all respondents, 54.8% and 47% fol-
lowed the X accounts of JTH and RPTH, respectively. The frequency at
which authors read posts made by RPTH (Figure 1A) and JTH
(Supplementary material) was similar for both journals, where
the majority read posts by both journals to some extent, and 36% did
not read any posts by either journal. X was the platform authors most
strongly preferred to have their papers promoted at (Figure 1B).
The majority of respondents (43.9%) reported they would more
likely publish again with a journal that shares their work on its social
media platforms, and 33.3% were somewhat more likely to publish
again, while only 22.8% were not impacted (Figure 1C). Of interest,
the majority (60%) of respondents who did not use social media at that
time were interested in being contacted if their paper had high
engagement on X. The majority (61%) preferred to write their own
messages to be used in social media promotion.
Out of all the total traffic to the RPTH website between January 1,
2023, and December 31, 2023, a significant 14.6% was directed from
social media platforms (Table), with the highest being X (11%), followed
by Facebook (1.9%) and LinkedIn (1.7%). The numbers may also be
higher than reported, as they do not account for users who copy the
web address or title of an article from a social media post into a web
browser instead of directly clicking a link from a social media post.
Compared with JTH, the RPTH website had a higher overall percentage
of referrals from social media (6.7% vs 14.6%) but a lower absolute
-
number of visits (12,267 vs 8785 visits; Table). Despite the lower overall
www.rpthjournal.org 1 of 4
2 of 4
- RESEARCH LETTER

A B

Read almost every post

13% by RPTH 23% More likely to
36% Frequently read posts publish again
by RPTH 44% Some impact
22% Occasionally read posts
by RPTH No impact
Rarely read posts by RPTH
33%
19% 10%
Never read posts by RPTH

C
Platform Overall Rank Rank Distribution Score No. of Rankings

X (Twitter) 1 277 80

Email Newsletters 2 208 80

LinkedIn 3 207 74

Facebook 4 101 63

Lowest Rank Highest Rank

F I G U R E 1 Respondent frequency of reading social media posts by Research and Practice in Thrombosis and Haemostasis (A), likelihood of
publishing again with a journal that shares publications on its social media platforms (B), and preferred social media platform for promoting
publications (C). RPTH, Research and Practice in Thrombosis and Haemostasis.

social media referral percentage to JTH compared with RPTH, JTH still
had a slightly higher percentage of LinkedIn referrals compared with
RPTH (2.1% vs 1.7%), and a larger proportion of its social media referrals
originated from LinkedIn. This demonstrates the effect of active journal
involvement in a specific platform on generating interest and traffic to
the journal articles since JTH has a LinkedIn presence and RPTH does
not (at the time of this publication).
Our findings reveal notable author presence on social media, a
majority of whom were active users who read the posts made by
RPTH and JTH, suggesting a pervasive interest in following scientific
publications on social media platforms (mostly X in May 2023). A
significant finding of our survey was that the authors’ decision to
publish again with the same journal was notably impacted by the
journal’s social media presence and its ability to disseminate their
work on social media. This implies a beneficial effect of social media
presence of scientific or medical journals on journal selection and
author preferences. It also suggests that authors appear to recognize
the potential advantages of increased visibility and accessibility
that come with social media promotion. This may be due to an im-
plicit understanding of the positive relationship between social me-
dia exposure and citation numbers [3], indicating a strategic
awareness among authors regarding the promotional value of these
platforms.
Our data on journal website traffic generated from social media
platforms throughout the year 2023 underscores the instrumental role
of social media in enhancing the visibility of journals. The significant
proportion of website traffic emanating from X suggests that social
media platforms can serve as effective conduits for directing users to
journal content. This is also highlighted by the larger amount of traffic
generated from LinkedIn toward JTH, which has a LinkedIn presence,
compared with RPTH, which currently does not. Journals should
recognize the potential of social media not only as a tool for author
engagement but also as a means of amplifying the reach of their pub-
lished work and ultimately the extent of scientific dissemination. Both
our survey and traffic data findings can provide insight that can impact
journal editorial and marketing strategies by focusing on enhancing
social media presence as a means of fostering stronger interest in being
a target journal for authors and increasing the visibility of the journal
and its publications. This can be achieved by delegating social media
management as a unique role, requiring a regular upkeep of the jour-
nal’s social media presence, engagement, and dissemination of its
publications on social media platforms. Journals should also recognize
the changes in usage and focus of different social media platforms,
which may require adjustments in social media strategies.
Our findings have several limitations. There may have been a
potential selection bias of respondents, as those who participated in
the surveys might have been more inclined toward active social media
usage, and we did not analyze for different variables among authors.
Furthermore, our research is specific to only two journals, which may
limit the generalizability of our findings. Future research could explore
RESEARCH LETTER
- 3 of 4

TABLE Sources of traffic to RPTH and JTH websites between January 1, 2023, and December 31, 2023.

RPTH JTH
Traffic source Number of visits Number of visits
(January 1-December 31, 2023) (total = 60,302) Percentage of visits (total = 184,283) Percentage of visits

Elsevier website 17,837 29.6 92,467 50.2

Typed/bookmarked 14,733 24.4 31,548 17.1

Google 13,388 22.2 31,324 17.0

ISTH Society websites

RPTH Journal website 10,179 16.9 209 0.1

JTH Journal website 429 0.7 31,140 16.9

ISTH main website 751 1.2 5329 2.9

Any social media 8785 14.6 12,267 6.7

X (Twitter) 6636 11.0 7501 4.1

LinkedIn 1022 1.7 3878 2.1

Facebook 1127 1.9 888 0.5

ISTH, International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis; JTH, Journal of Thrombosis and Haemostasis; RPTH, Research and Practice in Thrombosis
and Haemostasis.

a broader spectrum of journals and disciplines to ascertain the Luke Blount4

generalizability of these findings. Additionally, investigating the aca- Megan C. Brown5,6
demic rank or position, demographic variables, and geographic loca-
1
tion of authors could enhance our understanding of the patterns in Division of Hematology & Hematologic Malignancies, University of
author engagement with social media platforms and shed light on their Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA
2
significance for authors. Australian Red Cross Lifeblood R&D, Sydney, New South Wales,
In conclusion, our study illuminates the multifaceted benefits of Australia
3
integrating social media into the scholarly publishing landscape. The Department of Haematology, Singapore General Hospital,
positive impact on journal visibility, website traffic, and authors’ Singapore
4
likelihood to submit with the same journal highlights the need for International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis, Carrboro,
journals to adopt strategic and targeted social media practices. Ulti- North Carolina, USA
5
mately, this may help journals foster stronger interest in being a target Department of Pediatrics, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia, USA
6
for publication, enhance visibility and overall scientific dissemination, Aflac Cancer and Blood Disorders at Children’s Healthcare of
and generate awareness of its content and unique field of science. Atlanta, Atlanta, Georgia, USA

R EL AT I O NSH IP D I S CL O SUR E Handling Editor: Mike Makris

None of the authors have any relevant conflict of interest to disclose.
FUNDING I NF OR MATION
This research did not receive any funding.
Correspondence
Mouhamed Yazan Abou-Ismail, Division of Hematology &
Hematologic Malignancies, University of Utah, 2000 Circle of Hope
Drive, Salt Lake City, UT 84112, USA.

AUTH OR CONT RIBUTIONS Email: yazan.abou-ismail@hsc.utah.edu

M.Y.A., M.C.B., D.E.V., and M.A.C. designed the survey content. A.M.
created and distributed the survey and collected its data. L.B. per- ORCID

formed traffic data analysis. All authors contributed to the writing of Mouhamed Yazan Abou-Ismail https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6682-

the manuscript. M.Y.A. designed the graphical abstract and figure. 4366
Dianne E. van der Wal https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2542-5809

Mouhamed Yazan Abou-Ismail 1 May Anne Cheong https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1333-6596

Dianne E. van der Wal2

May Anne Cheong3 X, FOR MERL Y KNOWN A S TWI TT ER

Andrew Masten 4 Mouhamed Yazan Abou-Ismail @DoctorYazanA

4 of 4
- RESEARCH LETTER

Dianne E. van der Wal @DianvanderwalDr [3] Luc JGY, Archer MA, Arora RC, Bender EM, Blitz A, Cooke DT, et al. Does
May Anne Cheong @thebenignclot tweeting improve citations? One-year results from the TSSMN pro-
spective randomized trial. Ann Thorac Surg. 2021;111:296–300.
Andrew Masten @masten_andrew
[4] Cheong MA, van der Wal DE. Disseminating information on coagu-
Luke Blount @LukeBlount lation (DIC)/bleeding-the hemostatic balance of social media
Megan C. Brown @MeganBrownMD throughout the years. J Thromb Haemost. 2023;21:2997–9.
[5] Cormier M, Cushman M. Innovation via social media - the importance
of Twitter to science. Res Pract Thromb Haemost. 2021;5:373–5.
R EF E REN CE S
[1] Costas R, Honk JV, Franssen T. Scholars on Twitter: who and how
SUPPL EMENTAR Y MAT ERIAL
many are they? Int Conf Sci Inf. 2017;15:224–35.
[2] Nishikawa-Pacher A. The Twitter accounts of scientific journals: a data-
The online version contains supplementary material available at
set. 36. Insights; 2023. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rpth.2024.102387.