Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Scientists are financially dependent on the general public. Salaries and research expenses come (directly or indirectly) from taxpayers. The pub-lic’s understanding and appreciation of research is a motivational force for sci-entists. This is possibly one reason that scientists like their work to be cov-ered by the media. However, scientists have shown very little success in more directly communicating with the pub-lic about their findings. Despite the fact that scientists have been very successful in solving many seemingly unsolvable problems, (Fermat Last Theorem, step-ping onto the moon, sequencing genomes for many species, unraveling the com-plexity of different types of cancers, discovering the importance and appli-cations of the stem cells, to name a few), they have shown little success in telling the public about the value and signif-icance of these achievements nor have they made the public aware about existing challenges, leaving a big gap between sci-entific communities and the public. Given the ever-increasing popularity of social-network-based communications, scientists should ask themselves if they could use the
Koohy et al. (Mon,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: