Search

Introduction: The objective of this study was to analyze the messages of influential emergency medicine (EM) Twitter users in the United States (US) during the early stages of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) global pandemic by characterizing the themes, emotional tones, temporal viewpoints, and depth of engagement with the tweets.Methods: We performed a retrospective mixed-methods analysis of publicly available Twitter data derived from the publicly available “Coronavirus Tweet IDs” dataset, March 3, 2020–May 1, 2020. Original tweets and modified retweets in the dataset by 50 influential EM Twitter users in the US were analyzed using linguistic software to report the emotional tone and temporal viewpoint. We qualitatively analyzed a 25% random subsample and report themes.Results: There were 1315 tweets available in the dataset from 36/50 influential EM Twitter users in the US. The majority of tweets were either positive (455/1315, 34.6%) or neutral (407/1315, 31%) in tone and focused on the present (1009/1315, 76.7%). Qualitative analysis identified six distinct themes, with users most often sharing news or clinical information.Conclusions: During the early weeks of the COVID-19 pandemic, influential EM Twitter users in the US delivered mainly positive or neutral messages, most often pertaining to news stories or information directly relating to patient care. The majority of these messages led to engagement by other users. This study underscores how EM influencers can leverage social media in public health outbreaks to bring attention to topics of importance.

Introduction: As scholarship moves into the digital sphere, applicant and promotion and tenure (P&T) committee members lack formal guidance on evaluating the impact of digital scholarly work. The P&T process requires the appraisal of individual scholarly impact in comparison to scholars across institutions and disciplines. As dissemination methods evolve in the digital era, we must adapt traditional P&T processes to include emerging forms of digital scholarship.Methods: We conducted a blended, expert consensus procedure using a nominal group process to create a consensus document at the Council of Emergency Medicine Residency Directors Academic Assembly on April 1, 2019.Results: We discussed consensus guidelines for evaluation and promotion of digital scholarship with the intent to develop specific, evidence-supported recommendations to P&T committees and applicants. These recommendations included the following: demonstrate scholarship criteria; provide external evidence of impact; and include digital peer-review roles. As traditional scholarship continues to evolve within the digital realm, academic medicine should adapt how that scholarship is evaluated. P&T committees in academic medicine are at the epicenter for supporting this changing paradigm in scholarship.Conclusion: P&T committees can critically appraise the quality and impact of digital scholarship using specific, validated tools. Applicants for appointment and promotion should highlight and prepare their digital scholarship to specifically address quality, impact, breadth, and relevance. It is our goal to provide specific, timely guidance for both stakeholders to recognize the value of digital scholarship in advancing our field.

PurposeOnline open educational resources are increasingly used in medical education, particularly blogs and podcasts. However, it is unclear whether these resources can be adequately appraised by end-users. Our goal was to determine whether gestalt-based recommendations are sufficient for emergency medicine trainees and attending physicians to reliably recommend online educational resources to others.MethodsRaters (33 trainees and 21 attendings in emergency medicine from North America) were asked to rate 40 blog posts according to whether, based on their gestalt, they would recommend the resource to (1) a trainee or (2) an attending physician. The ratings' reliability was assessed using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC). Associations between groups' mean scores were assessed using Pearson's r. A repeated measures analysis of variance (RM-ANOVA) was completed to determine the effect of the level of training on gestalt recommendation scale (i. e. trainee vs. attending).ResultsTrainees demonstrated poor reliability when recommending resources for other trainees (ICC = 0.21, 95% CI 0.13-0.39) and attendings (ICC = 0.16, 95% CI = 0.09-0.30). Similarly, attendings had poor reliability when recommending resources for trainees (ICC = 0.27, 95% CI 0.18-0.41) and other attendings (ICC = 0.22, 95% CI 0.14-0.35). There were moderate correlations between the mean scores for each blog post when either trainees or attendings considered the same target audience. The RM-ANOVA also corroborated that there is a main effect of the proposed target audience on the ratings by both trainees and attendings.ConclusionsA gestalt-based rating system is not sufficiently reliable when recommending online educational resources to trainees and attendings. Trainees' gestalt ratings for recommending resources for both groups were especially unreliable. Our findings suggest the need for structured rating systems to rate online educational resources.

BackgroundQuality assurance concerns about social media platforms used for education have arisen within the medical education community. As more trainees and clinicians use resources such as blogs and podcasts for learning, we aimed to identify quality indicators for these resources. A previous study identified 151 potentially relevant quality indicators for these social media resources.ObjectiveTo identify quality markers for blogs and podcasts using an international cohort of health professions educators.MethodsA self-selected group of 44 health professions educators at the 2014 International Conference on Residency Education participated in a Social Media Summit during which a modified Delphi consensus study was conducted to determine which of the 151 quality indicators met the a priori ≥90% inclusion threshold.ResultsThirteen quality indicators classified into the domains of credibility (n=8), content (n=4) and design (n=1) met the inclusion threshold.ConclusionsThe quality indicators that were identified may serve as a foundation for further research on quality indicators of social media-based medical education resources and prompt discussion of their legitimacy as a form of educational scholarship.

Annals of Emergency Medicine collaborated with an educational Web site, Academic Life in Emergency Medicine (ALiEM) to host a public discussion featuring the 2014 Annals article on the outpatient management of patients with a spontaneous pneumothorax by using pigtail catheters. The objective was to curate a 14-day (November 10 to 23, 2014) worldwide academic dialogue among clinicians about the article. Four online facilitators hosted the multimodal discussion on the ALiEM Web site, Twitter, and Google Hangout. Comments across the social media platforms were curated for this report, as framed by 4 preselected questions. Engagement was tracked through Web analytic tools. Blog comments, tweets, and video expert commentary involving the featured article are summarized and reported. The dialogue resulted in 1,023 page views from 347 cities in 49 countries on the ALiEM Web site, 279,027 Twitter impressions, and 88 views of the video interview with experts. This Global Emergency Medicine Journal Club created a virtual community of practice from around the world and identified common themes around the management of spontaneous pneumothorax, which included substantial practice variation in regard to inpatient versus outpatient management, location of chest tube, the use of aspiration, and chest radiography after placement.

In July to August 2014, Annals of Emergency Medicine continued a collaboration with an academic Web site, Academic Life in Emergency Medicine (ALiEM), to host an online discussion session featuring the 2014 Annals Residents' Perspective article "Integration of Social Media in Emergency Medicine Residency Curriculum" by Scott et al. The objective was to describe a 14-day worldwide clinician dialogue about evidence, opinions, and early relevant innovations revolving around the featured article and made possible by the immediacy of social media technologies. Six online facilitators hosted the multimodal discussion on the ALiEM Web site, Twitter, and YouTube, which featured 3 preselected questions. Engagement was tracked through various Web analytic tools, and themes were identified by content curation. The dialogue resulted in 1,222 unique page views from 325 cities in 32 countries on the ALiEM Web site, 569,403 Twitter impressions, and 120 views of the video interview with the authors. Five major themes we identified in the discussion included curriculum design, pedagogy, and learning theory; digital curation skills of the 21st-century emergency medicine practitioner; engagement challenges; proposed solutions; and best practice examples. The immediacy of social media technologies provides clinicians the unique opportunity to engage a worldwide audience within a relatively short time frame.

Emergency physicians on the frontlines of the COVID‐19 pandemic are first‐hand witnesses to the direct impact of health misinformation and disinformation on individual patients, communities, and public health at large. Therefore, emergency physicians naturally have a crucial role to play to steward factual information and combat health misinformation. Unfortunately, most physicians lack the communications and social media training needed to address health misinformation with patients and online, highlighting an obvious gap in emergency medicine training. We convened an expert panel of academic emergency physicians who have taught and conducted research about health misinformation at the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine (SAEM) Annual Meeting in New Orleans, LA, on May 13, 2022. The panelists represented geographically diverse institutions including Baystate Medical Center/Tufts University, Boston Medical Center, Northwestern University, Rush Medical College, and Stanford University. In this article, we describe the scope and impact of health misinformation, introduce methods for addressing misinformation in the clinical environment and online, acknowledge the challenges of tackling misinformation from our physician colleagues, demonstrate strategies for debunking and prebunking, and highlight implications for education and training in emergency medicine. Finally, we discuss several actionable interventions that define the role of the emergency physician in the management of health misinformation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Construct: We investigated the quality of emergency medicine (EM) blogs as educational resources. Purpose: Online medical education resources such as blogs are increasingly used by EM trainees and clinicians. However, quality evaluations of these resources using gestalt are unreliable. We investigated the reliability of two previously derived quality evaluation instruments for blogs. Approach: Sixty English-language EM websites that published clinically oriented blog posts between January 1 and February 24, 2016, were identified. A random number generator selected 10 websites, and the 2 most recent clinically oriented blog posts from each site were evaluated using gestalt, the Academic Life in Emergency Medicine (ALiEM) Approved Instructional Resources (AIR) score, and the Medical Education Translational Resources: Impact and Quality (METRIQ-8) score, by a sample of medical students, EM residents, and EM attendings. Each rater evaluated all 20 blog posts with gestalt and 15 of the 20 blog posts with the ALiEM AIR and METRIQ-8 scores. Pearson's correlations were calculated between the average scores for each metric. Single-measure intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) evaluated the reliability of each instrument. Results: Our study included 121 medical students, 88 EM residents, and 100 EM attendings who completed ratings. The average gestalt rating of each blog post correlated strongly with the average scores for ALiEM AIR (r =.94) and METRIQ-8 (r =.91). Single-measure ICCs were fair for gestalt (0.37, IQR 0.25-0.56), ALiEM AIR (0.41, IQR 0.29-0.60) and METRIQ-8 (0.40, IQR 0.28-0.59). Conclusion: The average scores of each blog post correlated strongly with gestalt ratings. However, neither ALiEM AIR nor METRIQ-8 showed higher reliability than gestalt. Improved reliability may be possible through rater training and instrument refinement. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]