Science Intelligence and InfoPros

Little things about Scientitic Watch and Information Professionnals

Posts Tagged ‘Twitter

Pharma jobs on Twitter (EyeonFDA)

with one comment

Posts by Mark Senak are too rare: this one again is excellent…

A highly regulated industry like the medical products industry is often perceived as highly inhibited when it comes to social media. While it is true that such industries have to take care in their use of all communications in general, and social media in particular, there is nevertheless an increasing use of these platforms by the pharmaceutical, biotech and medical device sectors – collectively herein referred to as “pharma”. (…)

Pharma has put Twitter to use on many fronts.  One is jobs and recruitment, both within the U.S. and outside of the U.S.  There are now at least 21 pharma-sponsored Twitter feeds set up, some with more activity than others.”

Read the full post at:

Senak, Mark. Pharma jobs on Twitter. EyeonFDA, May 22, 2012. Availale from:

[accessed 23 May 2012]



Written by hbasset

May 23, 2012 at 8:19 pm

Posted in Pharmaceutical Industry

Tagged with

RSS Versus Twitter Versus Blogs!

leave a comment »

Below a digest of some discussions reported in 2 blogs:

  • May 2009, Rest in peace RSSIt’s time to get completely off RSS and switch to Twitter. RSS just doesn’t cut it anymore. (…) Suddenly everyone and their dog was convinced RSS was dead and we should all move on.
  • In early 2011 RSS still wasn’t quite dead. (…) To me, anytime someone says a tech is dead it usually means that tech is not very interesting to discuss anymore, or isn’t seeing the most innovative companies doing new things with it.
  • April 2012 – RSS still wasn’t quite dead (…) There’s a veritable explosion of companies removing RSS from their products … for whatever reason. Usually because it doesn’t directly benefit the bottom line – they prefer proprietary formats
  • RSS will never die because of a simple reality: power users. (…) RSS is here to stay for at least a while longer – all those people doing most of the sharing? A lot of their stuff comes from RSS.
  • Twitter is not a replacement for RSS. Not by a long shot. It’s too busy! (…) Consequently, RSS offers bigger exposure to your content.
  • Twitter seems to be the place to have conversations now rather then on blogs. That’s not to say blogs don’t have a place in both finding information and having discussions, but it would appear they’re being used for more reflective posts, which individuals can comment on, rather then short conversations involving lots of individuals


Teller, Swizec. RSS will never die. Zemanta Tech blog, April 26, 2012. Available from: [Accessed 4th of May 2012]

Mulla, James. The role of RSS and RSS readers. FUMSI, 30th of April 2012. Available from: [Accessed 4th of May 2012]

Written by hbasset

May 4, 2012 at 7:35 pm

Posted in Web 2.0

Tagged with , ,

Big Pharma: Social Media and camouflaged marketing

with 2 comments

An excellent study about how pharma companies use of the internet through direct-to-consumer (DTC) advertisements on the internet and internet based “social media”. To identify examples of fraudulent DTC marketing they used 4 major sources of information: scientific literature, gray literature, PubMed and the FDA website.

Some findings:

  • FaceBook: Pharmaceutical companies use this interface to promote drug sales. In July of 2010, the FDA issued a warning letter to Novartis for its Facebook advertising. Many companies removed their Facebook pages after August 2011, despite the fact that companies can delete these comments as soon as they are posted they were concerned that “open walls” would lead to the reporting of side effects, promotion of off-label use or inappropriate statements
  • Youtube:  A number of pharmaceutical companies have established YouTube channels for marketing purposes, including Abbott, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer-Ingelheim, GlaxoSmithKline, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi Pasteur… while the issues of advertising ethics and adherence to existing DTC advertisement standards are raised by these promotional outlets, of even greater concern are the unbranded (or covertly branded) YouTube channels that a number of pharmaceutical companies have introduced.
  • Twitter: Novo Nordisk uses the branded Tweet technic that does not mention drug benefits to maintain its status as a reminder advertisement. Web reminder ads do not have to provide any information on side effects.
  • Third-party endorsements: People are more likely to believe third party endorsements than identified corporate product advertising. To capitalize on this phenomenon companies have funded patient advocacy groups, disease specific expert panels and physician organizations to promote their drugs. Companies have transferred this clandestine marketing technique to the internet which is particularly well suited to support this subterfuge. Pharmaceutical companies have created websites for front organizations (labeled “Astroturf” sites – for fake grassroots) to promote their drugs. These pharmaceutical company-created websites appear to be unbiased sources of information.

Conclusion: ” Web 2.0 DTC is merely a subset of pharmaceutical marketing; however, as we have shown, it is more likely to be camouflaged, permits companies to directly gather data on patients, and changes rapidly. Internet DTC is difficult to monitor. (…) The majority of the public does not understand the possible side effects and ultimate purpose of DTC advertising; many believe that the mere presence of DTC advertising indicates that a drug is “perfectly safe.”

FDA has repeatedly cited pharmaceutical companies for illegal Web 2.0 marketing. Pharmaceutical companies have repeatedly called on the FDA to regulate web based marketing but the FDA has refused to issue any regulations. Thus Web 2.0 marketing remains an unregulated threat to public health and the general economy that must be addressed“.

Egilman, David & Druar, Nicholas M. 2012. Spin your science into gold: direct to consumer marketing within social media platforms. Work, Vol. 41, pp. 4494-4502. DOI: 10.3233/WOR-2012-0751-4494

Written by hbasset

April 26, 2012 at 8:03 pm

Let’s Blog and Tweet about paper research

leave a comment »

If you want people to find and read your research, build up a digital presence in your discipline, and use it to promote your work when you have something interesting to share. It’s pretty darn obvious, really:
If (social media interaction is often) then (Open access + social media = increased downloads).


Terras, Melissa. Is blogging and tweeting about research papers worth it? The Verdict. Melissa’s blog, Posted on 3rd April 2012, Available from: [Accessed 18th April 2012]

Written by hbasset

April 18, 2012 at 4:51 pm

Posted in Researchers

Tagged with ,

Values of Social Network for Scientists (by Comprendia)

with one comment

“Here at Comprendia, we’ve never advocated that Facebook should be recreated for scientists, as there are 700,000+ life science graduates in the US already using the application,* and they are likely already connected there to lab mates and colleagues. Rather, we should broaden our idea of the ‘social network’ to include any online community of scientists, not just those which are similar to Facebook. The value of social networks for scientists lies in faster access to information relevant to their research and the communities that are made more available by new tools. Here are 6 successful examples which can be used to understand scientific social communities. (…)

  1. Facebook Pages & LinkedIn Groups. Scientists have used mailing lists and forums for years. Facebook pages and LinkedIn groups are a ’2.0′ version of them with the benefits of centralization and easier access to participants. Life science companies, most notably Life Technologies, have fostered social networks in the form of Facebook pages centered on a topic.
  2. Twitter Hashtags. Scientists use Twitter to share scientific blog posts and news, to find friends and colleagues around a topic or event, and sometimes to vent about their situation. Hashtags, which are text identifiers for status updates on a topic, allow a Twitter social network to form around it…
  3. ScienceOnline
  4. True Social Networks. (…) ResearchGate’s has 1.4 million users, as we know that scientists don’t have time for frivolous endeavors, especially when they’re under the watchful eye of their Principal Investigator. As we noted in our post a year ago, there has to be a value for them to participate, and the successful ones center around research publications. BiomedExpertsCiteULikeResearchBlogging, andResearchGate had the highest traffic in our quick study, and they all rely heavily on publications. I like to say that PubMed was the first social network for scientists.
  5. Publication Sharing/Open Access. Related to the last point is a subject that requires its own mention as it transverses from proper social networks to desktop applications, Twitter, and even a movement to make research publications more accessible.Mendeley is the rock star of the publication sharing/open access genre, boasting 1.77 million users who are sharing 169 million publications. When we speak with life scientists at conferences or client visits, we often hear about the application even from those who are not strong believers in social media. Additionally, these applications have whetted scientists’ appetites for more open access to publications
  6. Blogs.  “blogs were one of the first forms of social media for scientists.”  Blog aggregators such as ResearchBlogging orScienceSeeker feature hundreds of blogs and likely a comparable number of communities focused around individual research topics.
At conferences and networking events today, we are seeing a transition, albeit slowly, to a new breed of scientists who understand the importance of scientific networks. We need to adjust our definition of scientific social networks to understand the next steps towards helping scientists use them to thrive.
What Is A Scientific Social Network? 6 Thriving and Inspiring Examples
Comprendia, March 12th, 2012

Written by hbasset

March 21, 2012 at 8:06 pm

Twitter for Scientists: a few tips (@BioInFocus)

leave a comment »

An entomogy student gives his personal appreciation on how to use Twitter to communicate with the Science Community. It is all about networking.

“By exposing myself to a wide array of scientists, I have found inspiration to apply to my own projects, methods to experiment with in future, and kindred spirits who are also working their way through the trials of academia and provide invaluable advice. As I move forward, who knows how these individuals may influence my career, with each “tweep” a potential collaborator, advisor or hiring committee member; fortune favours the prepared, and Twitter has allowed me to diversify my knowledge base significantly, better preparing me for future research obstacles.”

Wow, great conversations on science today. Twitter gives me the ability to have really smart and interesting people as officemates — Joshua Drew (@labroides) December 28, 2011

He gives also some sources (like ) and good hashtags:

“although grammatically terrible, #IcanhazPDF is the most useful hashtag for scientists in my opinion. If you or your institution does not have access to a journal, it can be frustrating, time-consuming and difficult to obtain a copy of a paper. Traditionally this obstacle would be overcome using interlibrary loan or contacting authors or other colleagues at different institutions and requesting copies directly. With #IcanhazPDF, the Twitter community has changed the game, crowd-sourcing paper requests from complete strangers across the world. The speed at which you can obtain a paper has now gone from days or weeks to minutes, allowing you to go on with your research & writing without delay. I can personally attest to this system, having made a request last spring and receiving the PDF via email less than 20 minutes later. While no different from making direct requests from colleagues (which has gone on for decades), there is the potential for legal trouble, so be sure to make an informed decision before taking part.

Morgan D. Jackson.Twitter for Scientists (and why you should try it) (#ScienceShare). Biodiversity in Focus, Posted on January 2nd of 2012.

Written by hbasset

January 3, 2012 at 6:40 pm

Posted in Uncategorized

Tagged with ,

European patients don’t want Big Pharma on Facebook

leave a comment »

PharmaLive reports interesting findings from a recent study:

Despite heavy restrictions on DTC advertising in Europe, nearly two in five online Europeans would like to be able to learn more about prescription drugs directly from a pharmaceutical company, according to the new Cybercitizen Health® Europe study from pharmaceutical and healthcare market research company Manhattan Research. (…)

Online consumers show much higher demand for practical online resources from pharmaceutical companies, such as disease and treatment information and condition management tools, than for online contests and games. (…)

Among consumers who are already using or interested in online information and tools from pharmaceutical companies, only 13 percent want to access this content on Facebook and 5 percent on Twitter. In contrast, 43 percent of this audience would like to obtain pharma resources from websites about conditions and diseases.

New Study Finds European Consumers Show Considerable Interest in Learning from Pharma Companies – But Not on Facebook or Twitter. PharmaLive, Posted on 12th of December 2011.

Written by hbasset

December 12, 2011 at 7:55 pm

Posted in Pharmaceutical Industry

Tagged with ,