Dataset Information

Burden and Characteristics of Unsolicited Emails from Medical/Scientific Journals, Conferences, and Webinars to Faculty and Trainees at an Academic Pathology Department.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Professionals and trainees in the medical and scientific fields may receive high e-mail volumes for conferences and journals. In this report, we analyze the amount and characteristics of unsolicited e-mails for journals, conferences, and webinars received by faculty and trainees in a pathology department at an academic medical center.

Methods

With informed consent, we analyzed 7 consecutive days of e-mails from faculty and trainees who voluntarily participated in the study and saved unsolicited e-mails from their institutional e-mail address (including junk e-mail folder) for medical/scientific journals, conferences, and webinars. All e-mails were examined for characteristics such as reply receipts, domain name, and spam likelihood. Journal e-mails were specifically analyzed for claims in the message body (for example, peer review, indexing in databases/resources, rapid publication) and actual inclusion in recognized journal databases/resources.

Results

A total of 17 faculty (4 assistant, 4 associate, and 9 full professors) and 9 trainees (5 medical students, 2 pathology residents, and 2 pathology fellows) completed the study. A total of 755 e-mails met study criteria (417 e-mails from 328 unique journals, 244 for conferences, and 94 for webinars). Overall, 44.4% of e-mails were flagged as potential spam by the institutional default settings, and 13.8% requested reply receipts. The highest burden of e-mails in 7 days was by associate and full professors (maximum 158 or approximately 8200 per year), although some trainees and assistant professors had over 30 e-mails in 7 days (approximately 1560 per year). Common characteristics of journal e-mails were mention of "peer review" in the message body and low rates of inclusion in recognized journal databases/resources, with 76.4% not found in any of 9 journal databases/resources. The location for conferences in e-mails included 31 different countries, with the most common being the United States (33.2%), Italy (9.8%), China (4.9%), United Kingdom (4.9%), and Canada (4.5%).

Conclusions

The present study in an academic pathology department shows a high burden of unsolicited e-mails for medical/scientific journals, conferences, and webinars, especially to associate and full professors. We also demonstrate that some pathology trainees and junior faculty are receiving an estimated 1500 unsolicited e-mails per year.

SUBMITTER: Krasowski MD

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6537630 | biostudies-literature | 2019

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:The rapid adoption rate and integration of mobile technology (tablet computing devices and smartphones) by physicians is reshaping the current clinical landscape. These devices have sparked an evolution in a variety of arenas, including educational media dissemination, remote patient data access and point of care applications. Quantifying usage patterns of clinical applications of mobile technology is of interest to understand how these technologies are shaping current clinical care. A digital survey examining mobile tablet and associated application usage was administered via email to all ACGME training programs. Data regarding respondent specialty, level of training, and habits of tablet usage were collected and analyzed. 40% of respondents used a tablet, of which the iPad was the most popular. Nearly half of the tablet owners reported using the tablet in clinical settings; the most commonly used application types were point of care and electronic medical record access. Increased level of training was associated with decreased support for mobile computing improving physician capabilities and patient interactions. There was strong and consistent desire for institutional support of mobile computing and integration of mobile computing technology into medical education. While many physicians are currently purchasing mobile devices, often without institutional support, successful integration of these devices into the clinical setting is still developing. Potential reasons behind the low adoption rate may include interference of technology in doctor-patient interactions or the lack of appropriate applications available for download. However, the results convincingly demonstrate that physicians recognize a potential utility in mobile computing, indicated by their desire for institutional support and integration of mobile technology into medical education. It is likely that the use of tablet computers in clinical practice will expand in the future. Thus, we believe medical institutions, providers, educators, and developers should collaborate in ways that enhance the efficacy, reliability, and safety of integrating these devices into daily medical practice.