Are Health-Related Tweets Evidence Based? Review and Analysis of Health-Related Tweets on Twitter.

BACKGROUND: Health care professionals are utilizing Twitter to communicate, develop disease surveillance systems, and mine health-related information. The immediate users of this health information is the general public, including patients. This necessitates the validation of health-related tweets by health care professionals to ensure they are evidence based and to avoid the use of noncredible information as a basis for critical decisions. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate health-related tweets on Twitter for validity (evidence based) and to create awareness in the community regarding the importance of evidence-based health-related tweets. METHODS: All tweets containing health-related information in the Arabic language posted April 1-5, 2015, were mined from Twitter. The tweets were classified based on popularity, activity, interaction, and frequency to obtain 25 Twitter accounts (8 physician accounts, 10 nonofficial health institute accounts, 4 dietitian accounts, and 3 government institute accounts) and 625 tweets. These tweets were evaluated by 3 American Board-certified medical consultants and a score was generated (true/false) and interobserver agreement was calculated. RESULTS: A total of 625 health-related Arabic-language tweets were identified from 8 physician accounts, 10 nonofficial health institute accounts, 4 dietician accounts, and 3 government institute accounts. The reviewers labeled 320 (51.2%) tweets as false and 305 (48.8%) tweets as true. Comparative analysis of tweets by account type showed 60 of 75 (80%) tweets by government institutes, 124 of 201 (61.7%) tweets by physicians, and 42 of 101 (41.6%) tweets by dieticians were true. The interobserver agreement was moderate (range 0.78-0.22). More than half of the health-related tweets (169/248, 68.1%) from nonofficial health institutes and dietician accounts (59/101, 58.4%) were false. Tweets by the physicians were more likely to be rated "true" compared to other groups (P<.001). CONCLUSIONS: Approximately half of the medical tweets from professional accounts on Twitter were found to be false based on expert review. Furthermore, most of the evidence-based health-related tweets are posted by government institutes and physicians.

Empirical therapy for male factor infertility: Survey of the current practice.

BACKGROUND: Empirical therapy is sometimes used by urologists who desire to improve the outcomes for infertility patients. However, the literature on empirical therapies is scarce. Therefore, we aimed to assess the clinical practice of urologists regarding the use of empirical therapy in the treatment of infertility patients. METHODOLOGY: An online survey using Google Forms was used to collect data during the Saudi Urological Association Annual Meeting, February 2019. Additional data were gathered electronically in March and April 2019 and sent to respondents. The study was closed in May 2019. No incentives were provided to the respondents. RESULTS: A total of 96 (80%) urologists participated in the survey, of whom 69.8% were consultants, and 20.8% were andrology-trained urologists. Empirical therapy was used by 86.5% of urologists for patients with idiopathic oligoasthenoteratozoospermia. The most commonly used empirical therapies were zinc, L-canitine, clomiphene citrate, and L-arginine. The main factors that influenced the selection of empirical therapy were follicle-stimulating hormone, total testosterone, and luteinizing hormone levels. CONCLUSION: Empirical therapy was used by more than three-quarters of the participants for idiopathic male infertility. There were no clear guidelines for the ideal therapy to be considered for individual patients while treating empirically. Our concern is that urologists use a wide variety of medications without significant data to support these medications.

Current surgical procedures for benign prostatic hyperplasia and impression of new surgical modalities.

BACKGROUND: Surgery is considered the most effective treatment for Benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) and Transurethral resection of prostat (TURP) is considered the gold standard. The goal of this study is to assess the surgical interventions used in Saudi Arabia, the difference in surgical procedures done depending on age and years of experience and the participant's impression on the new modalities in the management of BPH. METHODOLOGY: An online survey using Google Forms was sent to the participants. The data were collected during Saudi Urological Association Annual Meeting February 2019. Additional data were gathered 2 months later. The study was closed in May 2019. No incentives were provided to participants. RESULTS: A total of 65 (54.1% response rate) urologist participated in the survey, of whom 41.5% of respondents were aged <40 years, while 40% of them aged between 40 and 60 years. Forty-seven (72.3%) out of 65 were consultants. The essential investigations used by most participants prior to surgical interventions are prostate specific antigen, urine culture, urinalysis, and abdominal ultrasound. The most used surgical interventions are unipolar transurethral resection (TURP), Bipolar TURP, and open prostatectomy. About 50% of respondents preferred open prostatectomy for prostate size above 100 g. In general, 40%-50% of participants believe that urethral lift, Rezum, Aquablation, prostate artery embolization, and robotic simple prostatectomy are useful options. CONCLUSION: TURP continues to be the main intervention for prostate sizes <100 g. Open prostatectomy is widely used intervention for prostate sizes more than 100 g. New modalities gained little acceptance among urologist practicing in Saudi Arabia. Hands on workshops may help in educating urologists and introduce these new modalities for the future use.