9. REFERENCES

1. Loeb, S., et al. Use of social media in urology: data from the American Urological Association (AUA). BJU Int, 2014. 113: 993.

2. Rivas, J.G., et al. Social Media in Urology: opportunities, applications, appropriate use and new horizons. Cent European J Urol, 2016. 69: 293.

3. Global Social Media Statistics [Internet]. DataReportal – Global Digital Insights. [cited 2022 Jun 11]. Available from: https://datareportal.com/social-media-users.

4. Global social media statistics research summary 2022 [June 2022] [Internet]. [cited 2022 Jun 29]. Available from: https://www.smartinsights.com/social-media-marketing/social-media-strategy/new-global-social-media-research/.

5. Adults’ media use and attitudes [Internet]. Ofcom. 2022 [cited 2022 Jun 29]. Available from: https://www.ofcom.org.uk/research-and-data/media-literacy-research/adults/adults-media-use-and-attitudes.

6. Mining Social Media: A Brief Introduction | New Directions in Informatics, Optimization, Logistics, and Production | Tutorials in OR [Internet]. [cited 2022 Jun 29]. Available from: https://pubsonline.informs.org/doi/abs/10.1287/educ.1120.0105.

7. Koukaras, P., et al. Social Media Types: introducing a data driven taxonomy. Computing, 2020. 102: 295.

8. Neufeld D. The 50 Most Visited Websites in the World [Internet]. Visual Capitalist. 2021 [cited 2022 Jun 28]. Available from: https://www.visualcapitalist.com/the-50-most-visited-websites-in-the-world/.

9. The 15 Biggest Social Media Sites and Apps [2022] [Internet]. Dreamgrow. 2021 [cited 2022 Jun 28]. Available from: https://www.dreamgrow.com/top-15-most-popular-social-networking-sites/.

10. Twitter: most users by country [Internet]. Statista. [cited 2022 Jun 28]. Available from: https://www.statista.com/statistics/242606/number-of-active-Twitter-users-in-selected-countries/.

11. GWI. GWI - Audience Insight Tools, Digital Analytics & Consumer Trends [Internet]. [cited 2022 Jun 28]. Available from: https://www.gwi.com.

12. Madden M. Older Adults and Social Media [Internet]. Pew Research Center: Internet, Science & Tech. 2010 [cited 2022 Jun 29]. Available from: https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/2010/08/27/older-adults-and-social-media/.

13. Loeb, S., et al. Social media offers unprecedented opportunities for vibrant exchange of professional ideas across continents. Eur Urol, 2014. 66: 118.

14. Loeb, S., et al. Increasing Social Media Use in Urology: 2017 American Urological Association Survey. Eur Urol Focus, 2020. 6: 605.

15. Rivas, J.G., et al. Perceived Role of Social Media in Urologic Knowledge Acquisition Among Young Urologists: A European Survey. Eur Urol Focus, 2018. 4: 768.

16. Nolazco, J.I. Importance of Social Media for Urologist Networking - International Resident's Perspective. Can J Urol, 2018. 25: 9295.

17. Truong, H. Social Media in Urology - A U.S. Resident's Perspective. Can J Urol, 2018. 25: 9294.

18. Teoh, J.Y., et al. Social media and misinformation in urology: what can be done? BJU Int, 2021. 128: 397.

19. Roupret, M., et al. European Association of Urology (@Uroweb) recommendations on the appropriate use of social media. Eur Urol, 2014. 66: 628.

20. Borgmann, H., et al. Online Professionalism-2018 Update of European Association of Urology (@Uroweb) Recommendations on the Appropriate Use of Social Media. Eur Urol, 2018. 74: 644.

21. Murphy, D.G., et al. Engaging responsibly with social media: the BJUI guidelines. BJU Int, 2014. 114: 9.

22. Logghe, H.J., et al. Best Practices for Surgeons' Social Media Use: Statement of the Resident and Associate Society of the American College of Surgeons. J Am Coll Surg, 2018. 226: 317.

23. Kind, T. Professional guidelines for social media use: a starting point. AMA J Ethics, 2015. 17: 441.

24. Truong, H., et al. The Use of Social Media in Pediatric Urology-Forging New Paths or Crossing Boundaries? Curr Urol Rep, 2019. 20: 72.

25. HIPAA Journal. What is Considered PHI Under HIPAA? https://www.hipaajournal.com/considered-phi-hipaa/.

26. Modgil, V., et al. Social media in urology – what is all the fuss about? Journal of Clinical Urology, 2015. 8: 160.

27. Ehlert, M.J. Social Media and Online Communication: Clinical Urology Practice in the 21st Century. Urology Practice, 2015. 2: 2.

28. Rintoul-Hoad, S., et al. The Risks of Theft and Copyright Breach from Camera Use During Scientific Presentations: It's Time for a Debate. Eur Urol, 2018. 73: 815.

29. Koo, K., et al. Unprofessional content on Facebook accounts of US urology residency graduates. BJU Int, 2017. 119: 955.

30. Dubin, J.M., et al. Global survey evaluating drawbacks of social media usage for practising urologists. BJU Int, 2020. 126: 7.

31. Teoh, J.Y., et al. The Power of Hashtags in Social Media: Lessons Learnt from the Urology Tag Ontology Project. Eur Urol Focus, 2022. 8: 1565.

32. Kutikov, A., et al. Urology Tag Ontology Project: Standardizing Social Media Communication Descriptors. Eur Urol, 2016. 69: 183.

33. Teoh, J.Y., et al. The Power of Hashtags in Social Media: Lessons Learnt from the Urology Tag Ontology Project. Eur Urol Focus, 2022.

34. Loeb, S., et al. Update on the Urology Tag Ontology: Standardized Hashtags for Social Media in Urology. Eur Urol, 2019. 76: 261.

35. Samari, E., et al. A qualitative study on negative experiences of social media use and harm reduction strategies among youths in a multi-ethnic Asian society. PLoS One, 2022. 17: e0277928.

36. Loeb, S., et al. Tweet this: how advocacy for breast and prostate cancers stacks up on social media. BJU Int, 2017. 120: 461.

37. Sohn, E. Fundraising: The Ice Bucket Challenge delivers.Nature, 2017. 550: S113.

38. Vraga, E.K., et al.Cancer and Social Media: A Comparison of Traffic about Breast Cancer, Prostate Cancer, and Other Reproductive Cancers on Twitter and Instagram. J Health Commun, 2018. 23: 181.

39. Bravo, C.A., et al. Social Media and Men's Health: A Content Analysis of Twitter Conversations During the 2013 Movember Campaigns in the United States, Canada, and the United Kingdom. Am J Mens Health, 2017. 11: 1627.

40. Bravo, C.A., et al. Tweeting About Prostate and Testicular Cancers: Do Twitter Conversations and the 2013 Movember Canada Campaign Objectives Align? J Cancer Educ, 2016. 31: 236.

41. Bravo, C.A., et al. Tweeting About Prostate and Testicular Cancers: What Are Individuals Saying in Their Discussions About the 2013 Movember Canada Campaign? J Cancer Educ, 2016. 31: 559.

42. Johnson, B.S., et al. Using Google Trends and Twitter for Prostate Cancer Awareness: A Comparative Analysis of Prostate Cancer Awareness Month and Breast Cancer Awareness Month. Cureus, 2021. 13: e13325.

43. Cohen, S.A., et al. The impact of monthly campaigns and other high-profile media coverage on public interest in 13 malignancies: a Google Trends analysis. Ecancermedicalscience, 2020. 14: 1154.

44. Subasinghe, A.K., et al. Targeted Facebook Advertising is a Novel and Effective Method of Recruiting Participants into a Human Papillomavirus Vaccine Effectiveness Study. JMIR Res Protoc, 2016. 5: e154.

45. Britt, R.K., et al. "Sharing Hope and Healing": A Culturally Tailored Social Media Campaign to Promote Living Kidney Donation and Transplantation Among Native Americans. Health Promot Pract, 2021. 22: 786.

46. Kumar, K., et al. A Smartphone App for Increasing Live Organ Donation. Am J Transplant, 2016. 16: 3548.

47. Borgmann, H., et al. Feasibility and Efficacy of a Urologic Profession Campaign on Cryptorchidism Using Internet and Social Media. Urol Int, 2017. 98: 478.

48. Gordon, E.J., et al. Google analytics of a pilot mass and social media campaign targeting Hispanics about living kidney donation. Internet Interv, 2016. 6: 40.

49. Chang, A., et al. Identifying potential kidney donors using social networking web sites. Clin Transplant, 2013. 27: E320.

50. Henderson, M.L., et al. Social Media and Kidney Transplant Donation in the United States: Clinical and Ethical Considerations When Seeking a Living Donor. Am J Kidney Dis, 2020. 76: 583.

51. Kazley, A.S., et al. Social Media Use Among Living Kidney Donors and Recipients: Survey on Current Practice and Potential. J Med Internet Res, 2016. 18: e328.

52. Plackett, R., et al. Use of Social Media to Promote Cancer Screening and Early Diagnosis: Scoping Review. J Med Internet Res, 2020. 22: e21582.

53. Rodriguez Socarras, M., et al. Telemedicine and Smart Working: Recommendations of the European Association of Urology. Eur Urol, 2020.

54. Saade, K., et al. The Use of Social Media for Medical Education Within Urology: a Journey Still in Progress. Curr Urol Rep, 2021. 22: 57.

55. American Urological Association MediaRoom - Social Media Best Practices [Internet]. American Urological Association MediaRoom. [cited 2022 Nov 7]. Available from: https://auanet.mediaroom.com/index.php?s=20294.

56. Ding, M., et al. Urology education in the time of COVID-19. Can Urol Assoc J, 2020. 14: E231.

57. EMPIRE: Urology Lecture Series | New York Section, AUA [Internet]. [cited 2022 Nov 7]. Available from: https://nyaua.com/empire/.

58. Li, Y., et al. CASE-based and Guidelines-based Lectures are the Most Preferred Form of Online Webinar Education: Results from the Urology Collaborative Online Video Didactics Series (COViD). Urology, 2021. 158: 52.

59. Gonzalez, G., et al. Women's Experience with Stress Urinary Incontinence: Insights from Social Media Analytics. J Urol, 2020. 203: 962.

60. Lu, X., et al. Impact of Physician-Patient Communication in Online Health Communities on Patient Compliance: Cross-Sectional Questionnaire Study. J Med Internet Res, 2019. 21: e12891.

61. Sanguansak, T., et al. Two-Way Social Media Messaging in Postoperative Cataract Surgical Patients: Prospective Interventional Study. J Med Internet Res, 2017. 19: e413.

62. Daley, M.F., et al. Addressing Parents' Vaccine Concerns: A Randomized Trial of a Social Media Intervention. Am J Prev Med, 2018. 55: 44.

63. Yeo, S., et al. Caught in the net: Characterizing how testicular cancer patients use the internet as an information source. Can Urol Assoc J, 2021. 15: E400.

64. Jiang, T., et al. Is It All in My Head? Self-reported Psychogenic Erectile Dysfunction and Depression Are Common Among Young Men Seeking Advice on Social Media. Urology, 2020. 142: 133.

65. Jacobs, R., et al. The importance of social media for patients and families affected by congenital anomalies: A Facebook cross-sectional analysis and user survey. J Pediatr Surg, 2016. 51: 1766.

66. De Silva, D., et al. Machine learning to support social media empowered patients in cancer care and cancer treatment decisions. PLoS One, 2018. 13: e0205855.

67. Voran, D. Telemedicine and beyond. Mo Med, 2015. 112: 129.

68. What is telehealth? [Internet]. CCHP. [cited 2022 Nov 1]. Available from: https://www.cchpca.org/what-is-telehealth/.

69. State of Telehealth | NEJM [Internet]. [cited 2022 Nov 1]. Available from: https://www.nejm.org/doi/10.1056/NEJMra1601705.

70. Novara, G., et al. Telehealth in Urology: A Systematic Review of the Literature. How Much Can Telemedicine Be Useful During and After the COVID-19 Pandemic? Eur Urol, 2020. 78: 786.

71. Donelan, K., et al. Patient and clinician experiences with telehealth for patient follow-up care. Am J Manag Care, 2019. 25: 40.

72. Boehm, K., et al. Telemedicine Online Visits in Urology During the COVID-19 Pandemic-Potential, Risk Factors, and Patients' Perspective. Eur Urol, 2020. 78: 16.

73. Viers, B.R., et al. Efficiency, satisfaction, and costs for remote video visits following radical prostatectomy: a randomized controlled trial. Eur Urol, 2015. 68: 729.

74. Belarmino, A., et al. Feasibility of a Mobile Health Application To Monitor Recovery and Patient-reported Outcomes after Robot-assisted Radical Prostatectomy. Eur Urol Oncol, 2019. 2: 425.

75. Rastogi, R., et al. Management of Urinary Tract Infections in Direct to Consumer Telemedicine. J Gen Intern Med, 2020. 35: 643.

76. Mehrotra, A., et al. A comparison of care at e-visits and physician office visits for sinusitis and urinary tract infection. JAMA Intern Med, 2013. 173: 72.

77. Connor, M.J., et al. Clinical, fiscal and environmental benefits of a specialist-led virtual ureteric colic clinic: a prospective study. BJU Int, 2019. 124: 1034.

78. Safir, I.J., et al. Implementation of a Tele-urology Program for Outpatient Hematuria Referrals: Initial Results and Patient Satisfaction. Urology, 2016. 97: 33.

79. van Lankveld, J.J., et al. Internet-based brief sex therapy for heterosexual men with sexual dysfunctions: a randomized controlled pilot trial. J Sex Med, 2009. 6: 2224.

80. Hui, E., et al. Management of urinary incontinence in older women using videoconferencing versus conventional management: a randomized controlled trial. J Telemed Telecare, 2006. 12: 343.

81. Sjostrom, M., et al. Internet-based treatment of stress urinary incontinence: 1- and 2-year results of a randomized controlled trial with a focus on pelvic floor muscle training. BJU Int, 2015. 116: 955.

82. Hoffman, V., et al. Self-management of stress urinary incontinence via a mobile app: two-year follow-up of a randomized controlled trial. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand, 2017. 96: 1180.

83. Gricks, B., et al. Tweeting the meeting: an analysis of Twitter activity at the Royal Australasian College of Surgeons Annual Scientific Congress from 2015 to 2018. ANZ J Surg, 2019. 89: 1485.

84. Nomura, J.T., et al. Twitter use during emergency medicine conferences. Am J Emerg Med, 2012. 30: 819.

85. Pang, K.H., et al. The Impact of COVID-19 on European Health Care and Urology Trainees. Eur Urol, 2020. 78: 6.

86. Salem, J., et al. Integrating Social Media into Urologic Health care: What Can We Learn from Other Disciplines? Curr Urol Rep, 2016. 17: 13.

87. Wilkinson, S.E., et al. The social media revolution is changing the conference experience: analytics and trends from eight international meetings. BJU Int, 2015. 115: 839.

88. Kasivisvanathan, V., et al. The British Urology Researchers in Surgical Training (BURST) Research Collaborative: an alternative research model for carrying out large scale multi-centre urological studies. BJU Int, 2018. 121: 6.

89. Khadhouri, S., et al. The IDENTIFY study: the investigation and detection of urological neoplasia in patients referred with suspected urinary tract cancer - a multicentre observational study. BJU Int, 2021. 128: 440.

90. Khadhouri, S., et al. Developing a Diagnostic Multivariable Prediction Model for Urinary Tract Cancer in Patients Referred with Haematuria: Results from the IDENTIFY Collaborative Study. Eur Urol Focus, 2022. 8: 1673.

91. Teoh, J.Y., et al. A Global Survey on the Impact of COVID-19 on Urological Services. Eur Urol, 2020. 78: 265.

92. Tan, Y.Q., et al. Psychological Health of Surgeons in a Time of COVID-19: A Global Survey. Ann Surg, 2023. 277: 50.

93. Ciprut, S., et al. Twitter Activity Associated With U.S. News and World Report Reputation Scores for Urology Departments. Urology, 2017. 108: 11.

94. Borgmann, H., et al. Quantification of Urology Related Twitter Traffic Activity through a Standardized List of Social Media Communication Descriptors. Urology Practice, 2017. 4: 349.

95. Loeb, S., et al. Twitter-based Prostate Cancer Journal Club (#ProstateJC) Promotes Multidisciplinary Global Scientific Discussion and Research Dissemination. Eur Urol, 2019.

96. Nason, G.J., et al. The emerging use of Twitter by urological journals. BJU Int, 2015. 115: 486.

97. Koo, K., et al. Impact of Social Media Visual Abstracts on Research Engagement and Dissemination in Urology. J Urol, 2019. 202: 875.

98. Nolte, A.C., et al. Association Between Twitter Reception at a National Urology Conference and Future Publication Status. Eur Urol Focus, 2019.

99. Sathianathen, N.J., et al. Early Online Attention Can Predict Citation Counts for Urological Publications: The #UroSoMe_Score. Eur Urol Focus, 2020. 6: 458.

100. Hayon, S., et al. Twitter Mentions and Academic Citations in the Urologic Literature. Urology, 2019. 123: 28.

101. Cardona-Grau, D., et al. Introducing the Twitter Impact Factor: An Objective Measure of Urology's Academic Impact on Twitter. Eur Urol Focus, 2016. 2: 412.

102. Darling, E.S., et al. The role of Twitter in the life cycle of a scientific publication. PeerJ PrePrints 1:e16v1 https://doi.org/10.7287/peerj.preprints.16v1. 2013.

103. Thangasamy, I.A., et al. International Urology Journal Club via Twitter: 12-month experience. Eur Urol, 2014. 66: 112.

104. Bhatt, N.R., et al. A Systematic Review of the Use of Social Media for Dissemination of Clinical Practice Guidelines. Eur Urol Focus, 2021. 7: 1195.

105. Borgmann, H., et al. Novel survey disseminated through Twitter supports its utility for networking, disseminating research, advocacy, clinical practice and other professional goals. Can Urol Assoc J, 2015. 9: E713.

106. Gravas, S., et al. Impact of COVID-19 on medical education: introducing homo digitalis. World J Urol, 2021. 39: 1997.

107. Smigelski, M., et al. Urology Virtual Education Programs During the COVID-19 Pandemic. Curr Urol Rep, 2020. 21: 50.

108. Arslan, B., et al. Does YouTube include high-quality resources for training on laparoscopic and robotic radical prostatectomy? World J Urol, 2020. 38: 1195.

109. Crisostomo-Wynne, T., et al. Comparison of Robotic Surgery Video Quality Between YouTube and Curated Sources Using GEARS Criteria. Urology, 2021. 156: 44.

110. Haslam, R.E., et al. Educational Value of YouTube Surgical Videos of Pediatric Robot-Assisted Laparoscopic Pyeloplasty: A Qualitative Assessment. J Endourol, 2020. 34: 1129.

111. Yang, K., et al. Educational value of YouTube Surgical Videos of Thulium Laser Enucleation of The Prostate (ThuLEP): the quality assessment. Transl Androl Urol, 2021. 10: 2848.

112. Chen, Y.Z., et al. Educational value assessment of YouTube surgical videos of tension-free vaginal tape obturator (TVT-O) and trans-obturator vaginal tape (TOT). Transl Androl Urol, 2022. 11: 1.

113. Ho, P., et al. #AUAMatch: The Impact of COVID-19 on Social Media Use in the Urology Residency Match. Urology, 2021. 154: 50.

114. Manning, E., et al. Growth of the Twitter Presence of Academic Urology Training Programs and Its Catalysis by the COVID-19 Pandemic. Eur Urol, 2021. 80: 261.

115. Nguyen, D.D., et al. Virtual "matchmaking" without visiting electives: Overview of the early U.S. experience and potential applications to the 2021 Canadian urology match. Can Urol Assoc J, 2021. 15: 141.

116. Ghani, K.R., et al. Measuring to Improve: Peer and Crowd-sourced Assessments of Technical Skill with Robot-assisted Radical Prostatectomy. Eur Urol, 2016. 69: 547.

117. Houman, J., et al. Association of Social Media Presence with Online Physician Ratings and Surgical Volume Among California Urologists: Observational Study. J Med Internet Res, 2019. 21: e10195.

118. Gudaru, K., et al. Connecting the Urological Community : The #UroSoMe Experience. Journal of Endoluminal Endourology, 2019. 2: 320.

119. Castellani, D., et al. The past, the present and the future of #UroSoMe: a narrative review. AME Medical Journal, 2020.

120. Grabbert, M., et al. Comprehensive analysis of Twitter activity on #Incontinence. Neurourol Urodyn, 2020. 39: 440.

121. McLean, R., et al. Women and Kidney Disease: A Twitter Conversation for One and All. Kidney Int Rep, 2018. 3: 767.

122. Balasubramanian, A., et al. Analysing online Twitter discussions of bedwetting via a condition-specific hashtag (#Bedwetting). J Paediatr Child Health, 2021. 57: 1215.

123. Gonzalez, G., et al. Social media analytics of overactive bladder posts: what do patients know and want to know? Int Urogynecol J, 2021. 32: 2729.

124. Du, C., et al. I leaked, then I Reddit: experiences and insight shared on urinary incontinence by Reddit users. Int Urogynecol J, 2020. 31: 243.

125. Roso, C.C., et al. Life on Facebook: self-care in renal transplantation patients. Rev Gaucha Enferm, 2017. 38: e67430.

126. Elliott, J., et al. The bladder cancer patient survey: Global perspectives on awareness and treatment of bladder cancer. Journal of Cancer Policy, 2019. 22: 100207.

127. Huber, J., et al. Face-to-face vs. online peer support groups for prostate cancer: A cross-sectional comparison study. J Cancer Surviv, 2018. 12: 1.

128. Bhatt, N.R., et al. Social Media Interventions for Patients and Public: Opportunities and Challenges for the Urology Community. Eur Urol, 2023.

129. Rotenstein, L.S., et al. Lost Taussigs - The Consequences of Gender Discrimination in Medicine. N Engl J Med, 2018. 378: 2255.

130. Laurencin, C.T., et al. An American Crisis: the Lack of Black Men in Medicine. J Racial Ethn Health Disparities, 2017. 4: 317.

131. Cohen, J.J., et al. The case for diversity in the health care workforce. Health Aff (Millwood), 2002. 21: 90.

132. Alsan, M., et al. Does Diversity Matter for Health? Experimental Evidence from Oakland. American Economic Review, 2019. 109: 4071.

133. Committee on Diversity Issues [Internet]. ACS. [cited 2022 Nov 5]. Available from: https://www.facs.org/about-acs/governance/acs-committees/committee-on-diversity-issues/.

134. Equity, Diversity, & Inclusion [Internet]. AAMC. [cited 2022 Nov 5]. Available from: https://www.aamc.org/about-us/equity-diversity-inclusion.

135. Mishori, R., et al. #Diversity: Conversations on Twitter about Women and Black Men in Medicine. J Am Board Fam Med, 2019. 32: 28.

136. Ma, Z., et al. On predicting the popularity of newly emerging hashtags in Twitter. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 2013. 64: 1399.

137. Hughes, K.A. #ILookLikeASurgeon goes viral: How it happened. Bull Am Coll Surg, 2015. 100: 10.

138. Logghe, H., et al. #ILookLikeASurgeon: embracing diversity to improve patient outcomes. BMJ, 2017. 359: j4653.

139. Loeb, S., et al. #ILookLikeAUrologist: Using Twitter to Discuss Diversity and Inclusion in Urology. Eur Urol Focus, 2021. 7: 890.

140. Teoh, J.Y., et al. Social Media Analytics: What You Need to Know as a Urologist. Eur Urol Focus, 2020. 6: 434.

141. Thelwall, M., et al. Do altmetrics work? Twitter and ten other social web services. PLoS One, 2013. 8: e64841.

142. Giustini, A.J., et al. Association Between Citations, Altmetrics, and Article Views in Pediatric Research. JAMA Netw Open, 2020. 3: e2010784.

143. Altmetric. The donut and Altmetric Attention Score. https://www.altmetric.com/about-us/our-data/donut-and-altmetric-attention-score/.

144. Canvasser, N.E., et al.The use of social media in endourology: an analysis of the 2013 World Congress of Endourology meeting. J Endourol, 2015. 29: 615.

145. Borgmann, H., et al. Qualitative Twitter analysis of participants, tweet strategies, and tweet content at a major urologic conference. Can Urol Assoc J, 2016. 10: 39.

146. Nolte, A.C., et al. Association Between Twitter Reception at a National Urology Conference and Future Publication Status. Eur Urol Focus, 2021. 7: 214.

147. O'Kelly, F., et al. The effect of social media (#SoMe) on journal impact factor and parental awareness in paediatric urology. J Pediatr Urol, 2017. 13: 513 e1.

148. Nocera, A.P., et al. Examining the Correlation Between Altmetric Score and Citations in the Urology Literature. Urology, 2019. 134: 45.

149. Chandrasekar, T., et al. Twitter and academic Urology in the United States and Canada: a comprehensive assessment of the Twitterverse in 2019. BJU Int, 2020. 125: 173.

150. Salgia, N.J., et al. Examining the Association of Academic Rank and Productivity with Metrics of Twitter Utilization Amongst Kidney Cancer Specialists. Kidney Cancer, 2020. 4: 103.

151. Lau, A.Y., et al. Impact of web searching and social feedback on consumer decision making: a prospective online experiment. J Med Internet Res, 2008. 10: e2.

152. Charnock, D., et al. DISCERN: an instrument for judging the quality of written consumer health information on treatment choices. J Epidemiol Community Health, 1999. 53: 105.

153. Gabarron, E., et al. Identifying Measures Used for Assessing Quality of YouTube Videos with Patient Health Information: A Review of Current Literature. Interact J Med Res, 2013. 2: e6.

154. Shoemaker, S.J., et al. Development of the Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool (PEMAT): a new measure of understandability and actionability for print and audiovisual patient information. Patient Educ Couns, 2014. 96: 395.

155. Alsyouf, M., et al. 'Fake News' in urology: evaluating the accuracy of articles shared on social media in genitourinary malignancies. BJU Int, 2019.

156. Tanwar, R., et al. Benign prostatic hyperplasia related content on YouTube: unregulated and concerning. Recenti Prog Med, 2015. 106: 337.

157. Serinken, M., et al. The reliability of national videos related to the kidney stones on YouTube. Turk J Urol, 2016. 42: 7.

158. Xu, A.J., et al. TikTok and prostate cancer: misinformation and quality of information using validated questionnaires. BJU Int, 2021. 128: 435.

159. Canon, D.E., et al. Towards Assisted Moderation in Online Healthcare Social Networks: Improving Trust in YouTube Searches. Stud Health Technol Inform, 2014. 200: 146.

160. Fernandez-Luque, L., et al. HealthTrust: a social network approach for retrieving online health videos. J Med Internet Res, 2012. 14: e22.

161. Boyer, C., et al. Evolution of health web certification through the HONcode experience. Stud Health Technol Inform, 2011. 169: 53.

162. Ji, L., et al. Evaluating the Quality of Overactive Bladder Patient Education Material on YouTube: A Pilot Study Using the Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool. Urology, 2020. 145: 90.

163. Selvi, I., et al. Can YouTube Video on Urological Problems Be Used As An Additional Resource in Telemedicine During the COVID-19 Pandemic? J Urol Surg 2021;8:69-85. 2021.

164. Cacciamani, G.E., et al. Asking "Dr. Google" for a Second Opinion: The Devil Is in the Details. Eur Urol Focus, 2021. 7: 479.

165. Teoh, J.Y., et al. Social Media Analytics: What You Need to Know as a Urologist. Eur Urol Focus, 2019.

166. Zhao, Y., et al. Consumer health information seeking in social media: a literature review. Health Info Libr J, 2017. 34: 268.

167. Pratsinis, M., et al. Systematic assessment of information about surgical urinary stone treatment on YouTube. World J Urol, 2021. 39: 935.

168. Taylor, J., et al. Guideline of guidelines: social media in urology. BJU Int, 2020. 125: 379.

Panel