#### **EDITORIAL** ![](https://assets.reachrx.ai/images/10.1007%E2%98%8Ds10067-025-07909-8/_page_0_Picture_2.jpeg) # **Social media platforms for ethical post‑publication promotion** **Olena Zimba1,2,3 [·](http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4188-8486) Yuliya Fedorchenko4 [·](http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5042-1191) Burhan Fatih Kocyigit[5](http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6065-8002)** Received: 30 October 2025 / Revised: 10 December 2025 / Accepted: 19 December 2025 © The Author(s), under exclusive licence to International League of Associations for Rheumatology (ILAR) 2026 ### **Social media platforms in the age of digitization** The Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) database defnes social media as: "*Platforms that provide the ability and tools to create and publish information accessed* via *the INTERNET*." These platforms facilitate efective interaction between content generators and viewers/followers [[1\]](#page-3-0). Basically, social media operate not just as promotion platforms but also enable global visibility of published contents, hypothesis generation, distribution of research tools, and science communication [\[2\]](#page-3-1). Over the past decade, social media platforms have emerged as an essential source of open-access information for health professionals, patients, and the public at large [\[3](#page-3-2), [4](#page-3-3)]. As post-publication communication channels, social media contribute to scholarly article visibility, increasing chances of garnering citations and boosting traditional and alternative journal metrics [[5\]](#page-3-4). Subsequently, new aggregate indicators, such as the Altmetric Attention Score, have emerged as valuable article-level metrics that refect societal implications of scholarly outputs [[6](#page-3-5)]. \* Burhan Fatih Kocyigit bfk2701@hotmail.com > Olena Zimba zimbaolena@gmail.com Yuliya Fedorchenko yufedorchenko@ifnmu.edu.ua - ¹ Department of Rheumatology, Immunology and Internal Medicine, University Hospital in Krakow, Krakow, Poland - ² National Institute of Geriatrics, Rheumatology and Rehabilitation, Warsaw, Poland - ³ Department of Internal Medicine N2, Danylo Halytsky Lviv National Medical University, Lviv, Ukraine - ⁴ Department of Pathophysiology, Ivano-Frankivsk National Medical University, Ivano-Frankivs'k, Ukraine - ⁵ Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, University of Health Sciences, Adana City Research and Training Hospital, Kışla District, Dr. Mithat Özsan Boulevard, 4522. Street No:28, Yüreğir/Adana, Turkey Social media platforms are variably employed across countries and academic communities. Journal editors are increasingly utilizing social media to expand their audience. Recent data from Central and Eastern Europe and Central Asia indicate increasing use of social media within academic and clinical communities, underscoring heightened regional engagement in digital dissemination [\[7,](#page-3-6) [8\]](#page-3-7). Additionally, several academic societies have recently launched social media platforms to expand their outreach and improve communication with their members. Most reputable journals have launched and nurtured a variety of social media channels, including those on X (formerly Twitter), Facebook, LinkedIn, Instagram, YouTube, and emerging platforms like Threads and Bluesky, to serve the interests of their followers with diverse professional and linguistic backgrounds [[9,](#page-3-8) [10](#page-3-9)]. Along with ofcial journal accounts, individual health professionals with skills of ethical post-publication promotion have massively populated popular social media channels for exposing their research fndings and widening their collaboration circles. Individual patients and related communities have also embraced the opportunities ofered by digitization and open online communication, aiming to enhance disease awareness and access cutting-edge information related to prevention, treatment, and rehabilitation [[11](#page-3-10), [12](#page-3-11)]. Numerous advantages and benefits offered by social media—such as rapid dissemination of information, increased societal impact, and opportunities for post-publication evaluation—are also accompanied by risks, including the dissemination of unverifed and, at times, healthdamaging (mis)information, breaches of patient privacy, and broader violations of ethical communication norms [[13\]](#page-3-12). ### **The essential role of highly skilled and motivated social media editors** Hiring highly-skilled social media editors for ethical and professional promotion of journal contents has become a necessity for most journals and related professional societies and publishers. Although there are currently ![](https://assets.reachrx.ai/images/10.1007%E2%98%8Ds10067-025-07909-8/_page_0_Picture_22.jpeg) no standardized metrics or validated scales for assessing the competence of academic social media editors, their role generally necessitates ethical communication skills, familiarity with journal policies, and the ability to create accurate, platform-appropriate contents that encourage post-publication engagement. The best examples of prioritizing such a necessity are top rheumatology journals represented on various online platforms by professional "infuencers" and motivated researchers. Social media editors occupy their niche in the hierarchy of journal promotion and development to distinguish potentially impactful and useful contents and guide publishing editors in their attempts to upgrade research reporting standards [\[14](#page-3-13)]. Meticulously crafted posts by professional editors engage interested online users/followers in ethical post-publication communication and aid in boosting the scientifc prestige of related journals. Essentially, proper social media management transforms journals from passive repositories into lively hubs of trustworthy and impactful scholarly contents [[15](#page-3-14)]. Importantly, the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) encourages post-publication discussions of all stakeholders of scientifc communications via professionally moderated channels [[16](#page-3-15)]. Arguably, social media platforms can be viewed as the most important options for facilitating such discussions, distinguishing useful information, and correcting erroneous contents. As such, hiring highly skilled and motivated social media editors serves the purpose of ethical publishing, promoting, and correcting journals. # **Post‑publication promotion via diverse social media platforms** Post-publication promotion should not be limited to a single online platform. A variety of social media platforms should be employed to reach academic communities with diverse professional and linguistic backgrounds, diversifying knowledge dissemination and enhancing multidisciplinary engagement. Currently available platforms serve distinct interests of various professional communities: - Facebook is a tool for connecting with the broader public and patient communities. Journal posts on this platform may reach a broader audience by employing advanced visualization tools and easily understandable summaries of scholarly articles [\[17\]](#page-3-16). - LinkedIn facilitates interaction of professional groups, seeking research and clinical jobs. Summaries of journal publications on this platforms may enhance collaboration and formation of new research teams [[18\]](#page-3-17). - YouTube is a platform for posting audio and video materials commenting on published articles. Selected audio and video abstracts may reach a global audience interested in short summaries of cutting-edge scientifc information [\[19](#page-3-18)]. - X (formerly Twitter) is perhaps the most popular channel for the dissemination of scientifc information and contribution to alternative metrics of most journals. Journal posts on X outnumber those on many other online platforms and thereby quantitatively boost aggregate social media metrics. The global rheumatology community has established numerous communication networks on X that facilitate the dissemination of article summaries, educational content, and congress outputs [\[20](#page-3-19)]. - Increasingly popular platforms, such as Bluesky and Threads, facilitate enhanced content creation and analysis and enable the interaction of online users who are not present on other platforms. These platforms enhance the diversity within the online scholarly community [[21\]](#page-4-0). Implementing a multi-channel approach to post-publication promotion boosts the journal's visibility while simultaneously reinforcing the inclusiveness of scientifc communication. Journal presence on multiple platforms broadens the audience and increases the societal impact. Rheumatology articles simultaneously promoted on multiple online platforms may reach a large number of interested clinicians, patients, policymakers, and research funding agents. An efective publishing strategy in the age of digitization necessitates an integrated post-publication communication model that leverages the strengths of various social media platforms. ### **Perspectives on artifcial intelligence– powered social media** The rapid advances in digitization have prioritized the ethical use of artifcial intelligence tools for generating social media posts. Modern artifcial intelligence models have provided ample opportunities for fast and efcient postpublication communication by journal editors and authors alike [[22\]](#page-4-1). Artifcial intelligence models may help to generate visually attractive posts which are tailored to requirements of various social media platforms and interests of various professional communities [[23\]](#page-4-2). The generated posts should be edited by highly-skilled social media editors to ensure the accuracy and integrity. The editors are required to add a human touch to the generated posts [[24](#page-4-3)]. Rapidly advancing artificial intelligence models are anticipated to help social media editors in their planning, decision-making, and performance analyzing processes. In ![](https://assets.reachrx.ai/images/10.1007%E2%98%8Ds10067-025-07909-8/_page_1_Picture_15.jpeg) line with this prediction, artifcial intelligence will assume a crucial role in the generation of advanced social media posts and optimization of post-publication communication. # **Advantages and drawbacks of social media platforms** Social media platforms are essential for the democratization of scholarly publishing and post-publication communication. These platforms facilitate the rapid dissemination of research results and encourage immediate post-publication discussions. The conceptual framework of social media importance in scientifc publishing is depicted in Fig. [1.](#page-2-0) There are numerous advantages of social media platforms and some drawbacks. ### **Advantages** - *Fast distribution of information*. Social media enhance the exposure of published contents and stimulate immediate resonance among large groups of online followers. Notably, altmetric data indicate a positive correlation between social media shares and rates of article readership and citations [[25\]](#page-4-4). - *Societal impact*. Online communication of health professionals, journal editors, and patients adds value to information sharing and supporting the society at large. Such - an advantage aids in disseminating scientifc discoveries in understandable terms and concepts [[12\]](#page-3-11). - *Post-publication evaluation*. Promotion of published contents on social media stimulates post-publication evaluation and encourages interested followers to comment on strengths, limitations, and errors, thereby contributing to the clarity, accuracy, and impact of the publishing process [[26](#page-4-5)]. #### **Drawbacks** - *Misinterpretation and distortion.* The text messaging and microblogging on social media may lead to misinterpretation or exaggeration of complex scientifc fndings, introducing misperceptions of clinical studies [[27](#page-4-6)]. - *Patient privacy, confdentiality, and competing interest ıssues.* Unintentional dissemination of patient data, sensitive images, and failure to disclose confict of interests related to pharmaceutical industry may result in health and reputational damages to patients, health professionals, and journal editors [\[28](#page-4-7)]. - *Issues with source credibility.* The rapid dissemination of non-verifed and apparently erroneous contents poses risks of misleading online followers. Social media editors should exercise extra caution when generating online posts and rely on their professionalism to avoid misinformation [\[29](#page-4-8)]. ![](https://assets.reachrx.ai/images/10.1007%E2%98%8Ds10067-025-07909-8/_page_2_Figure_13.jpeg) **Fig. 1** The conceptual framework of social media in scientifc publishing #### **Social media activities for identifying errors** In recent years, social media platforms have emerged as complementary tools for identifying erroneous and unethical articles [\[30\]](#page-4-9). Research communities and independent post-publication discussion platforms, such as the Retraction Watch Blog, aid in revealing numerous instances of errors and ethical violations in published articles [[31](#page-4-10)]. Consequently, journals may initiate the retraction process in view of post-publication discussions on social media. Taken together, social media are powerful tools for both facilitating promotion and fostering scientifc self-regulation. # **Conclusion** Social media platforms are crucial elements of modern scientifc communication. For journals and health professionals, these platforms serve as tools to expedite information dissemination and enhance scientifc visibility, engagement, and public awareness. Nevertheless, harnessing this potential within ethical frameworks is crucial for preserving scientifc integrity. The neglect of accuracy, transparency, and accountability in social media posts heightens the risk of misinterpretation of scientifc fndings. Consequently, journals should engage qualifed social media editors to ensure efective and ethical utilization of these platforms. #### **Acknowledgements** None **Author contribution** All authors contributed equally to the writing of this editorial and have reviewed and approved the fnal version of the manuscript. **Funding** None #### **Declarations** **Disclosures** None ### **References** - 1. Medical Subject Headings (MeSH). U.S. National Library of Medicine. Social Media. Available from: [https://www.ncbi.nlm.](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/mesh/68061108) [nih.gov/mesh/68061108](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/mesh/68061108). Accessed 27 Oct 2025 - 2. Yessirkepov M, Gasparyan AY (2021) Embracing social media for generating and testing hypotheses. Cent Asian J Med Hypotheses Ethics 2:133–136. - 3. Zimba O, Radchenko O, Strilchuk L (2020) Social media for research, education and practice in rheumatology. Rheumatol Int 40:183–190. - 4. Myeoung BJ, Park JH, Lee BJ, Jeong HJ, Kim A, So MW, Lee SG (2024) Social media has become a mainstream source of medical information for patients with rheumatic diseases: a cross-sectional - survey of patients. Rheumatol Int 44:2159–2166. [https://doi.org/](https://doi.org/10.1007/s00296-024-05634-0) [10.1007/s00296-024-05634-0](https://doi.org/10.1007/s00296-024-05634-0) - 5. Zimba O, Korkosz M, Alnaimat F, Fragoulis GE, Yessirkepov M, Baimukhamedov C, Kocyigit BF (2025) Global practice guidelines in rheumatology: a cross-sectional altmetric and citation analysis. Rheumatol Int 45:150. [https://doi.org/10.1007/](https://doi.org/10.1007/s00296-025-05899-z) [s00296-025-05899-z](https://doi.org/10.1007/s00296-025-05899-z) - 6. Koçyiğit BF, Akyol A (2021) Altmetrics and citation metrics as complementary indicators for research management. Cent Asian J Med Hypotheses Ethics 2:79–84. [https://doi.org/10.47316/](https://doi.org/10.47316/cajmhe.2021.2.2.01) [cajmhe.2021.2.2.01](https://doi.org/10.47316/cajmhe.2021.2.2.01) - 7. Yessirkepov M, Zimba O, Gasparyan AY (2020) Emerging online tools and platforms for scholarly activities in medicine. Cent Asian J Med Hypotheses Ethics 1:112–117. [https://doi.org/10.](https://doi.org/10.47316/cajmhe.2020.1.2.01) [47316/cajmhe.2020.1.2.01](https://doi.org/10.47316/cajmhe.2020.1.2.01) - 8. Pidvalna U, Holota S, Kryshchyshyn-Dylevych A, Telishevska U, Lonchyna V, Zayachkivska O, Lishchuk-Yakymovych K (2025) The role of social media in shaping scientifc medical journals. Proc Shevchenko Sci Soc Med Sci 77:20. [https://doi.org/10.](https://doi.org/10.25040/ntsh2025.01.20) [25040/ntsh2025.01.20](https://doi.org/10.25040/ntsh2025.01.20) - 9. Pineda C, Pérez-Neri I, Sandoval H (2019) Challenges for social media editors in rheumatology journals: an outlook. Clin Rheumatol 38:1785–1789. - 10. Mukhamediyarov M, Bekaryssova D, Zimba O (2025) Social media landscape of rheumatology journals. Rheumatol Int 45:215. - 11. Rolls K, Hansen M, Jackson D, Elliott D (2016) How health care professionals use social media to create virtual communities: an integrative review. J Med Internet Res 18:e166. [https://doi.org/10.](https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.5312) [2196/jmir.5312](https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.5312) - 12. Smailhodzic E, Hooijsma W, Boonstra A, Langley DJ (2016) Social media use in healthcare: a systematic review of efects on patients and on their relationship with healthcare professionals. BMC Health Serv Res 16:442. [https://doi.org/10.1186/](https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-016-1691-0) [s12913-016-1691-0](https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-016-1691-0) - 13. Chou WS, Oh A, Klein WMP (2018) Addressing health-related misinformation on social media. JAMA 320:2417–2418. [https://](https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2018.16865) [doi.org/10.1001/jama.2018.16865](https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2018.16865) - 14. Lopez M, Chan TM, Thoma B, Arora VM, Trueger NS (2019) The social media editor at medical journals: responsibilities, goals, barriers, and facilitators. Acad Med 94:701–707. [https://doi.org/](https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0000000000002496) [10.1097/ACM.0000000000002496](https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0000000000002496) - 15. Siau K, Lui R, Mahmood S (2020) The role of a social media editor: what to expect and tips for success. United Eur Gastroenterol J 8:1253–1257. - 16. Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) (2025) History and code of conduct. Publication Ethics. Available from: [https://publicatio](https://publicationethics.org/about/what-we-do/our-story/history-code-conduct) [nethics.org/about/what-we-do/our-story/history-code-conduct](https://publicationethics.org/about/what-we-do/our-story/history-code-conduct). Accessed 27 Oct 2025 - 17. Afsar AP, Ghosh S, Titus RS, Cheng K, Kanawala AA, Kerkhof P, Day J, Gupta L (2024) Content analysis of patient support groups related to myositis on Facebook. Clin Rheumatol 43:725–732. - 18. Micieli JA, Tsui E (2015) Ophthalmology on social networking sites: an observational study of Facebook, Twitter, and LinkedIn. Clin Ophthalmol 9:285–290. [https://doi.org/10.2147/OPTH.](https://doi.org/10.2147/OPTH.S79032) [S79032](https://doi.org/10.2147/OPTH.S79032) - 19. Yemeshev Y, Bekaryssova D, Koçyiğit BF (2025) Assessment of the quality and reliability of YouTube videos related to teleradiology in musculoskeletal and rheumatic diseases: a crosssectional study. Rheumatol Int 45:74. [https://doi.org/10.1007/](https://doi.org/10.1007/s00296-025-05831-5) [s00296-025-05831-5](https://doi.org/10.1007/s00296-025-05831-5) - 20. Abbasi-Perez A, Alvarez-Mon MA, Donat-Vargas C, Ortega MA, Monserrat J, Perez-Gomez A, Sanz I, Alvarez-Mon M (2021) Analysis of tweets containing information related to ![](https://assets.reachrx.ai/images/10.1007%E2%98%8Ds10067-025-07909-8/_page_3_Picture_33.jpeg) - rheumatological diseases on Twitter. Int J Environ Res Public Health 18:9094. - 21. Schukow CP, Punjabi LS, Khan E (2025) A primer on Bluesky (and PathSky) for pathologists, trainees, and medical students. Adv Anat Pathol 32:356–360. [https://doi.org/10.1097/PAP.00000](https://doi.org/10.1097/PAP.0000000000000491) [00000000491](https://doi.org/10.1097/PAP.0000000000000491) - 22. Mondal H, Mondal S (2023) How artifcial intelligence can help researchers in the promotion of their articles? Indian J Ophthalmol 71:2293–2294. [https://doi.org/10.4103/IJO.IJO\\_296\\_23](https://doi.org/10.4103/IJO.IJO_296_23) - 23. Pan L, Wang CY, Zhou F, Lü L (2024) Complexity of social media in the era of generative AI. Natl Sci Rev 12:nwae323. [https://doi.](https://doi.org/10.1093/nsr/nwae323) [org/10.1093/nsr/nwae323](https://doi.org/10.1093/nsr/nwae323) - 24. Kocyigit BF, Zhaksylyk A (2023) Advantages and drawbacks of ChatGPT in the context of drafting scholarly articles. Cent Asian J Med Hypotheses Ethics 4:163–167. [https://doi.org/10.47316/](https://doi.org/10.47316/cajmhe.2023.4.3.04) [cajmhe.2023.4.3.04](https://doi.org/10.47316/cajmhe.2023.4.3.04) - 25. Kudchadkar SR, Carroll CL (2020) Using social media for rapid information dissemination in a pandemic: #PedsICU and coronavirus disease 2019. Pediatr Crit Care Med 21:e538–e546. [https://](https://doi.org/10.1097/PCC.0000000000002474) [doi.org/10.1097/PCC.0000000000002474](https://doi.org/10.1097/PCC.0000000000002474) - 26. Faulkes Z (2014) The vacuum shouts back: post-publication peer review on social media. Neuron 82:258–260. [https://doi.org/10.](https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2014.03.032) [1016/j.neuron.2014.03.032](https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2014.03.032) - 27. Gupta L, Gasparyan AY, Misra DP, Agarwal V, Zimba O, Yessirkepov M (2020) Information and misinformation on COVID-19: a cross-sectional survey study. J Korean Med Sci 35:e256. - 28. Zimba O, Gasparyan AY, Qumar AB (2024) Ethics for disseminating health-related information on YouTube. J Korean Med Sci 39:e93. - 29. Vraga EK, Bode L (2021) Addressing COVID-19 misinformation on social media preemptively and responsively. Emerg Infect Dis 27:396–403. - 30. Zheng ET, Fu HZ, Thelwall M, Fang Z (2025) Can social media provide early warning of retraction? Evidence from critical tweets identifed by human annotation and large language models. J Assoc Inf Sci Technol. - 31. Retraction Watch (2025) Taylor & Francis threatens legal action against anonymous group's 'highly defamatory' claims. Retraction Watch. Available from: [https://retractionwatch.com/2025/](https://retractionwatch.com/2025/09/26/taylor-francis-threatens-legal-action-against-anonymous-groups-highly-defamatory-claims/) [09/26/taylor-francis-threatens-legal-action-against-anonymous](https://retractionwatch.com/2025/09/26/taylor-francis-threatens-legal-action-against-anonymous-groups-highly-defamatory-claims/)[groups-highly-defamatory-claims/.](https://retractionwatch.com/2025/09/26/taylor-francis-threatens-legal-action-against-anonymous-groups-highly-defamatory-claims/) Accessed 27 Oct 2025 **Publisher's Note** Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional afliations. ![](https://assets.reachrx.ai/images/10.1007%E2%98%8Ds10067-025-07909-8/_page_4_Picture_14.jpeg)