Skip to main content Accessibility help

What Makes a Tweet Fly? Analysis of Twitter Messaging at Four Infection Control Conferences

  • Brett G. Mitchell (a1) (a2), Philip L. Russo (a1) (a2) (a3), Jonathan A. Otter (a4), Martin A. Kiernan (a5) and Landon Aveling (a1)...



To examine tweeting activity, networks, and common topics mentioned on Twitter at 4 international infection control and infectious disease conferences.


A cross-sectional study.


An independent company was commissioned to undertake a Twitter ‘trawl’ each month between July 1, 2016, and November 31, 2016. The trawl identified any tweets that contained the official hashtags of the conferences for (1) the UK Infection Prevention Society, (2) IDWeek 2016, (3) the Federation of Infectious Society/Hospital Infection Society, and (4) the Australasian College for Infection Prevention and Control. Topics from each tweet were identified, and an examination of the frequency and timing of tweets was performed. A social network analysis was performed to illustrate connections between users. A multivariate binary logistic regression model was developed to explore the predictors of ‘retweets.’


In total, 23,718 tweets were identified as using 1 of the 2 hashtags of interest. The results demonstrated that the most tweets were posted during the conferences. Network analysis demonstrated a diversity of twitter networks. A link to a web address was a significant predictor of whether a tweet would be retweeted (odds ratio [OR], 2.0; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.9–2.1). Other significant factors predicting a retweet included tweeting on topics such as Clostridium difficile (OR, 2.0; 95% CI, 1.7–2.4) and the media (OR, 1.8; 95% CI, 1.6–2.0). Tweets that contained a picture were significantly less likely to be retweeted (OR, 0.06; 95% CI, 0.05–0.08).


Twitter is a useful tool for information sharing and networking at infection control conferences.

Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2017;38:1271–1276


Corresponding author

Address correspondence to: Brett G. Mitchell, School of Nursing, Clinical Education Centre, 185 Fox Valley Road, Wahroonga, NSW, Australia, 2076 ( and Twitter: @1healthau).


Hide All
1. Goff, DA, Kullar, R, Newland, JG. Review of Twitter for infectious diseases clinicians: useful or a waste of time? Clin Infect Dis 2015;60:15331540.
2. Kaplan, AM, Haenlein, M. Users of the world, unite! The challenges and opportunities of Social Media. Business Horizons 2010;53:5968.
3. 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:e85.
4. Liu, S, Volcic, Z, Gallois, C. Introducing Intercultural Communication: Global Cultures and Contexts. London: Sage; 2014.
5. Chung, A, Woo, H. Twitter in urology and other surgical specialties at global conferences. ANZ J Surg 2016;86:224227.
6. Kiernan, M, Wigglesworth, N. The use of social media in the dissemination of information from scientific meetings. J Infect Prev 2011;12:224225.
7. Randviir, EP, Ilingworth, SM, Baker, MJ, Cude, M, Banks, CE. Twittering about research: A case study of the world’s first twitter poster competition. F1000Research 2015;4:798.
8. Cochran, A, Kao, LS, Gusani, NJ, Suliburk, JW, Nwomeh, BC. Use of Twitter to document the 2013 Academic Surgical Congress. J Surg Res 2014;190:3640.
9. Mishori, R, Levy, B, Donvan, B. Twitter use at a family medicine conference. Fam Med 2014;46:608614.
10. Borgatti, S, Everett, M., Johnson, J. Analyzing Social Networks. London: Sage; 2013.
11. Hansen, D, Shneiderman, B, Smith, MA. Analyzing Social Media Networks with NodeXL: Insights from a Connected World. Burlington, MA: Morgan Kaufmann; 2010.

Related content

Powered by UNSILO
Type Description Title
Supplementary materials

Mitchell supplementary material 1
Mitchell supplementary material

 Word (21 KB)
21 KB
Supplementary materials

Mitchell supplementary material 2
Mitchell supplementary material

 Word (226 KB)
226 KB

What Makes a Tweet Fly? Analysis of Twitter Messaging at Four Infection Control Conferences

  • Brett G. Mitchell (a1) (a2), Philip L. Russo (a1) (a2) (a3), Jonathan A. Otter (a4), Martin A. Kiernan (a5) and Landon Aveling (a1)...


Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed.