Literature DB >> 23141117

Using social media to improve continuing medical education: a survey of course participants.

Amy T Wang1, Nicole P Sandhu, Christopher M Wittich, Jayawant N Mandrekar, Thomas J Beckman.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To determine continuing medical education (CME) course participants' use of social media (SM) and their attitudes about the value of SM for enhancing CME education and to examine associations between participants' characteristics and attitudes toward SM. PARTICIPANTS AND METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional survey and validation study of 539 participants at a Mayo Clinic Internal Medicine CME course in November 2011. The Social Media Use and Perception Instrument (SMUPI) consisted of 10 items (5-point Likert scales) and categorical response options. The main outcome measures were psychometric characteristics of the SMUPI scale, course participants' use of SM, and their attitudes regarding the importance of SM for enhancing CME.
RESULTS: Of 539 CME course participants, 327 (61%) responded to the SMUPI survey. Most respondents (291 [89%]) reported using SM, with the most common types being YouTube (189 of the 327 participants [58%]) and Facebook (163 of 327 [50%]). Factor analysis revealed a 2-dimensional assessment of course participants' attitudes. Internal consistency reliability (Cronbach α) was excellent for factor 1 (0.94), factor 2 (0.89), and overall (0.94). The CME course participants' favorable attitudes toward SM were associated with younger age (20-29 years, mean score 3.13; 30-39 years, 3.40; 40-49 years, 3.39; 50-59 years, 3.18; 60-69 years, 2.93; and ≥70 years, 2.92; P=.02), using SM frequently (never, mean score 2.49; less than once monthly, 2.75; once monthly, 3.21; weekly, 3.31; and daily, 3.81; P<.0001), and professional degree (PhD, mean score 3.00; MD, 3.05; DO, 3.35; PA, 3.42; and NP, 3.50; P=.01).
CONCLUSION: We describe the first validated measure of CME course participants' use of and attitudes toward SM. Our results suggest that CME course directors should guide SM strategies toward more youthful, technology-savvy CME participants and that SM will become increasingly worthwhile in CME as younger learners continue to enter the profession.
Copyright © 2012 Mayo Foundation for Medical Education and Research. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 23141117      PMCID: PMC3541935          DOI: 10.1016/j.mayocp.2012.07.024

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Mayo Clin Proc        ISSN: 0025-6196            Impact factor:   7.616


  34 in total

Review 1.  Physician response to surveys. A review of the literature.

Authors:  S E Kellerman; J Herold
Journal:  Am J Prev Med       Date:  2001-01       Impact factor: 5.043

2.  Validity: on meaningful interpretation of assessment data.

Authors:  Susan M Downing
Journal:  Med Educ       Date:  2003-09       Impact factor: 6.251

3.  A comparison of clinical teaching evaluations by resident and peer physicians.

Authors:  Thomas J Beckman; Mark C Lee; Jayawant N Mandrekar
Journal:  Med Teach       Date:  2004-06       Impact factor: 3.650

Review 4.  How reliable are assessments of clinical teaching? A review of the published instruments.

Authors:  Thomas J Beckman; Amit K Ghosh; David A Cook; Patricia J Erwin; Jayawant N Mandrekar
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2004-09       Impact factor: 5.128

5.  Web-based learning in residents' continuity clinics: a randomized, controlled trial.

Authors:  David A Cook; Denise M Dupras; Warren G Thompson; V Shane Pankratz
Journal:  Acad Med       Date:  2005-01       Impact factor: 6.893

6.  The interpersonal, cognitive and efficiency domains of clinical teaching: construct validity of a multi-dimensional scale.

Authors:  Thomas J Beckman; Jayawant N Mandrekar
Journal:  Med Educ       Date:  2005-12       Impact factor: 6.251

7.  The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data.

Authors:  J R Landis; G G Koch
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  1977-03       Impact factor: 2.571

8.  Changing physician performance. A systematic review of the effect of continuing medical education strategies.

Authors:  D A Davis; M A Thomson; A D Oxman; R B Haynes
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1995-09-06       Impact factor: 56.272

9.  Response rates to mail surveys published in medical journals.

Authors:  D A Asch; M K Jedrziewski; N A Christakis
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  1997-10       Impact factor: 6.437

10.  Impact of formal continuing medical education: do conferences, workshops, rounds, and other traditional continuing education activities change physician behavior or health care outcomes?

Authors:  D Davis; M A O'Brien; N Freemantle; F M Wolf; P Mazmanian; A Taylor-Vaisey
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1999-09-01       Impact factor: 56.272

View more
  17 in total

1.  YOUTUBE videos on oral care of the organ or hematopoietic stem cell transplant patients.

Authors:  Pia López-Jornet; Eduardo Pons-Fuster; Juan Antonio Ruiz-Roca
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2016-11-22       Impact factor: 3.603

2.  Tweetchats, Disseminating Information, and Sparking Further Scientific Discussion with Social Media.

Authors:  Michael A Chary; Peter R Chai
Journal:  J Med Toxicol       Date:  2020-02-24

3.  Integrating web 2.0 in clinical research education in a developing country.

Authors:  Mohamed Amgad; Ahmad Samir AlFaar
Journal:  J Cancer Educ       Date:  2014-09       Impact factor: 2.037

Review 4.  The social (media) side to rheumatology.

Authors:  Francis Berenbaum
Journal:  Nat Rev Rheumatol       Date:  2014-03-04       Impact factor: 20.543

5.  CREOGs Over Coffee: Feasibility of an Ob-Gyn Medical Education Podcast by Residents.

Authors:  Fei Cai; R Nicholas Burns; Bridget Kelly; B Star Hampton
Journal:  J Grad Med Educ       Date:  2020-06

6.  The acceptability among health researchers and clinicians of social media to translate research evidence to clinical practice: mixed-methods survey and interview study.

Authors:  Jacqueline Tunnecliff; Dragan Ilic; Prue Morgan; Jennifer Keating; James E Gaida; Lynette Clearihan; Sivalal Sadasivan; David Davies; Shankar Ganesh; Patitapaban Mohanty; John Weiner; John Reynolds; Stephen Maloney
Journal:  J Med Internet Res       Date:  2015-05-20       Impact factor: 5.428

7.  A systematic review of methods for studying consumer health YouTube videos, with implications for systematic reviews.

Authors:  Margaret Sampson; Jordi Cumber; Claudia Li; Catherine M Pound; Ann Fuller; Denise Harrison
Journal:  PeerJ       Date:  2013-09-12       Impact factor: 2.984

8.  Use of Social Network Sites for Communication Among Health Professionals: Systematic Review.

Authors:  Windy Sy Chan; Angela Ym Leung
Journal:  J Med Internet Res       Date:  2018-03-28       Impact factor: 5.428

Review 9.  The use of Facebook in medical education--a literature review.

Authors:  Tanja Pander; Severin Pinilla; Konstantinos Dimitriadis; Martin R Fischer
Journal:  GMS Z Med Ausbild       Date:  2014-08-15

10.  Translating Evidence Into Practice via Social Media: A Mixed-Methods Study.

Authors:  Stephen Maloney; Jacqueline Tunnecliff; Prue Morgan; Jamie E Gaida; Lyn Clearihan; Sivalal Sadasivan; David Davies; Shankar Ganesh; Patitapaban Mohanty; John Weiner; John Reynolds; Dragan Ilic
Journal:  J Med Internet Res       Date:  2015-10-26       Impact factor: 5.428

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.