Dataset Information

Sepsis information-seeking behaviors via Wikipedia between 2015 and 2018: A mixed methods retrospective observational study.

ABSTRACT: Raising public awareness of sepsis, a potentially life-threatening dysregulated host response to infection, to hasten its recognition has become a major focus of physicians, investigators, and both non-governmental and governmental agencies. While the internet is a common means by which to seek out healthcare information, little is understood about patterns and drivers of these behaviors. We sought to examine traffic to Wikipedia, a popular and publicly available online encyclopedia, to better understand how, when, and why users access information about sepsis. Utilizing pageview traffic data for all available language localizations of the sepsis and septic shock pages between July 1, 2015 and June 30, 2018, significantly outlying daily pageview totals were identified using a seasonal hybrid extreme studentized deviate approach. Consecutive outlying days were aggregated, and a qualitative analysis was undertaken of print and online news media coverage to identify potential correlates. Traffic patterns were further characterized using paired referrer to resource (i.e. clickstream) data, which were available for a temporal subset of the pageviews. Of the 20,557,055 pageviews across 65 linguistic localizations, 47 of the 1,096 total daily pageview counts were identified as upward outliers. After aggregating sequential outlying days, 25 epochs were examined. Qualitative analysis identified at least one major news media correlate for each, which were typically related to high-profile deaths from sepsis and, less commonly, awareness promotion efforts. Clickstream analysis suggests that most sepsis and septic shock Wikipedia pageviews originate from external referrals, namely search engines. Owing to its granular and publicly available traffic data, Wikipedia holds promise as a means by which to better understand global drivers of online sepsis information seeking. Further characterization of user engagement with this information may help to elucidate means by which to optimize the visibility, content, and delivery of awareness promotion efforts.

SUBMITTER: Jabaley CS

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6705833 | biostudies-literature | 2019

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Sepsis information-seeking behaviors via Wikipedia between 2015 and 2018: A mixed methods retrospective observational study.

Jabaley Craig S CS Groff Robert F RF Barnes Theresa J TJ Caridi-Scheible Mark E ME Blum James M JM O'Reilly-Shah Vikas N VN

PloS one 20190822 8

Raising public awareness of sepsis, a potentially life-threatening dysregulated host response to infection, to hasten its recognition has become a major focus of physicians, investigators, and both non-governmental and governmental agencies. While the internet is a common means by which to seek out healthcare information, little is understood about patterns and drivers of these behaviors. We sought to examine traffic to Wikipedia, a popular and publicly available online encyclopedia, to better u ...[more]

PMID: 31437248

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:Current medical professions involve an extensive knowledge of the latest validated scientific data to implement disease diagnosis, therapeutic strategies, and patient care. Although clinicians can refer to a growing number and type of information sources to keep current with new scientific achievements, there are still various concerns about medical information validity, quality, and applicability into clinical practice. Novel strategies are required to identify physicians' real-life needs with the final aim to improve modern medical information delivery. OBJECTIVE:Our research used an innovative tool to collect real-time physician queries in order to investigate information needs and seeking behavior of Italian neurologists treating patients with multiple sclerosis (MS) and migraine. METHODS:The study was designed as an exploratory mixed methods (ie, qualitative and quantitative) study involving 15 consecutive days of observation. A total of 50 neurologists (n=25 MS and n=25 migraine specialists) were recruited. Data were collected using an instant messaging mobile app designed for this research. At each information-seeking event, moderators triggered a computer-assisted personal interview including both semistructured interview and close-ended questions. Interactions and physician queries collected using the mobile app were coded into emerging themes by content analysis. RESULTS:Neurologist queries were relevant to the following major themes: therapy management (36/50, 71%) and drug-related information (34/50, 67%), followed by diagnostic strategies and procedures (21/50, 42%). Quantitative analysis indicated online resources were preferentially used by clinicians (48/50, 96%) compared with offline sources (24/50, 47%). A multichannel approach, in which both online and offline sources were consulted to meet the same need, was adopted in 33% (65/198) of information-seeking events. Neurologists more likely retrieved information from online relative to offline channels (F=1.7; P=.01). MS specialists were 53% more likely to engage in one information-seeking event compared with migraine neurologists (risk ratio 1.54; 95% CI 1.16-2.05). MS specialists tended to be more interested in patient-related content than migraine clinicians (28% [7/25] vs 10% [2/25], P=.06), who conversely more likely sought information concerning therapy management (85% [21/25] vs 60% [15/25], P=.05). Compared with MS clinicians, migraine specialists had a harder time finding the required information, either looking at online or offline channels (F=12.5; P=.01) and less frequently used offline channels (30% [8/25] vs 60% [15/25] of information-seeking events, P=.02). When multiple sources needed to be consulted to retrieve an information item, a reduced satisfaction rate was observed both among migraine and MS specialists (single source vs multiple sources P=.003). CONCLUSIONS:This study provides a detailed description of real-life seeking behavior, educational needs, and information sources adopted by Italian MS and migraine neurologists. Neurologist information needs and seeking behavior reflect the specific characteristics of the specialty area in which they operate. These findings suggest identification of time- and context-specific needs of clinicians is required to design an effective medical information strategy.

Project description:ObjectivesSepsis awareness and understanding are important aspects of prevention, recognition, and clinical management of sepsis. We conducted a scoping review to identify and map the literature related to sepsis awareness, general knowledge, and information-seeking behaviors with a goal to inform future sepsis research and knowledge translation campaigns.DesignScoping review.SettingUsing Arksey and O'Malley's methodological framework, we conducted a systematic search on May 3, 2021, across four databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and Education Research Complete). Title/abstract and full-text screening was done in duplicate. One researcher extracted the data for each included article, and a second researcher checked data accuracy. The protocol was registered on Open Science Framework ( https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/YX7AU ).SubjectsArticles related to sepsis awareness, knowledge, and information seeking behaviors among patients, public, and healthcare professionals.InterventionsNone.Measurements and main resultsOf 5,927 unique studies, 80 reported on patient ( n = 13/80;16.3%), public ( n = 15/80;18.8%), or healthcare professional (nurses, physicians, emergency medical technicians) ( n = 48/80; 60%) awareness and knowledge of sepsis. Healthcare professional awareness and knowledge of sepsis is high compared with patients/public. The proportion of patients/public who had heard of the term sepsis ranged from 2% (Japan) to 88.6% (Germany). The proportions of patients/public who correctly identified the definition of sepsis ranged from 4.2% (Singapore) to 92% (Sweden). The results from the included studies appear to suggest that patient/public awareness of sepsis gradually improved over time. We found that the definition of sepsis was inconsistent in the literature and that few studies reported on patient, public, or healthcare professional knowledge of sepsis risk factors. Most patient/public get their sepsis information from the internet, whereas healthcare professionals get it from their role in healthcare through job training or educational training.ConclusionsPatient, public, and healthcare professional awareness and knowledge of sepsis vary globally. Future research may benefit from a consistent definition as well as country-specific data to support targeted public awareness campaigns.

Project description:ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to better understand parental trust in and satisfaction with information sources and medical providers regarding decision making about childhood vaccines.SettingThe study was part of a Swiss national research programme investigating vaccine hesitancy and underimmunisation.ParticipantsWe conducted qualitative interviews with 37 providers and 30 parents, observed 34 vaccination consultations, and then conducted quantitative surveys with 130 providers (both complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) oriented and biomedically oriented) and 1390 parents.Main outcome measuresParticipants' vaccination information sources used in their decision-making process, parents' trust in and satisfaction with these sources and providers.ResultsBased on the Parent Attitudes about Childhood Vaccines scale, we considered 501 parents as vaccine-hesitant (VH) and 889 parents as non-VH. Whereas both groups mentioned providers as the most trusted source of information, VH-parents were less likely to mention paediatricians (N=358 (71%) vs N=755 (85%)) and public health authorities (N=101 (20%) vs N=333 (37%)) than non-VH-parents. VH-parents were more likely to have consulted another provider (N=196 (39%) vs N=173 (19%)) than non-VH-parents, to express less satisfaction with both their primary (N=342 (82%) vs N=586 (91%)) and other providers (N=82 (42%) vs N=142 (82%)) and less trust in their primary (N=368 (88%) vs N=632 (98%)) and other providers (N=108 (55%) vs N=146 (84%)). VH-parents were less likely to be satisfied with their biomedical primary provider than non-VH-parents (100 (69%) vs 467 (91%)). However, when the primary provider was CAM-oriented, there were similar levels of satisfaction among both groups (237 (89%) VH-parents vs 118 (89%) non-VH-parents). All differences were significant (p<0.05).ConclusionsWhile the provider remains the main information source, VH parents turn to additional sources and providers, which is likely related to VH parents being rather dissatisfied with and distrusting in obtained information and their provider.EthicsThe local ethics committee (Ethikkommission Nordwest- und Zentralschweiz, EKNZ; project ID number 2017-00725) approved the study.

Project description:BackgroundIn early childhood allergy prevention (ECAP), parents act on behalf of their children. Parental health literacy and the availability of high-quality information, both online and offline, are crucial for effective ECAP. Recent research highlights three main points. First, parents need sufficient health literacy to discriminate between high-quality and low-quality information. Second, ECAP information behaviors may vary between phases of childhood development and according to individual circumstances. Third, to strengthen user-centeredness of available services, a better overview of parents' information practices and needs and how they handle uncertainties is required.ObjectiveThis study aims to explore why, how, and when parents search for and apply ECAP-specific health information and which individual (eg, understanding of advice) and organizational challenges (eg, information services, information complexity, and changing recommendations) they perceive and how they handle them. This study also aims to assess the needs and preferences that parents express for future information formats and contents. The findings should inform the practical design of ECAP information as well as formats and channels specific to different parent groups.MethodsThe above-named issues will be explored with parents in four German cities as one element in our efforts to cover the spectrum of perspectives. Based on a mixed methods design, including qualitative and quantitative assessments, the first year serves to prepare focus groups, a piloted focus group guide, a short standardized survey adapted from the European Health Literacy Project, recruitment channels, and the recruitment of participants. After conducting 20 focus groups in the second year, data will be analyzed via a constant comparison method in the third year. Based on this, practice implications on channels (ie, Where?), formats (ie, How?), and contents (ie, What?) of ECAP-specific information will be derived and discussed with parents and associated project partners before its dissemination to relevant ECAP actors (eg, childcare institutions and pediatricians).ResultsThe study began with preselection of recruitment channels, drafting of recruitment and study information for potential participants, and agreement on a first full version of the guideline. Then, a detailed contact list was compiled of health professionals, administrative and social institutions, and relevant social media channels (N=386) to be approached for assistance in contacting parents. The recruitment was postponed due to COVID-19 and will start in January 2021.ConclusionsECAP is a relevant example for assessing how users (ie, parents) handle not only health information but the various and continuous changes, uncertainties, and controversies attached to it. So far, it is unclear how parents implement the respective scientific recommendations and expert advice, which is why this study aims to inform those who communicate with parents about ECAP information.International registered report identifier (irrid)PRR1-10.2196/25474.

Project description:BackgroundOne of the largest groups of consumers who seek health information on the internet are parents of young children, as well as people in their social circle. The concept of proxy seeking (on behalf of others) has been explored in the literature, yet little is known about the outcomes.ObjectiveThe main aim of this study was to describe consumer health information outcomes reported by proxy seekers using a parenting website.MethodsWe conducted a 2-year quantitative observational study. Participants were parents of 0- to 8-year-old children and members of their entourage in Canada who had accessed Naître et Grandir through the website or through a weekly newsletter. For each Naître et Grandir webpage, participants' perceptions regarding the outcomes of seeking and using specific webpages were gathered using a content-validated Information Assessment Method questionnaire. We compared the outcomes reported by parents with those reported by members of their entourage after consulting a parenting information website and explored if the method of accessing the information by the proxy seekers (website or weekly newsletter) changed the outcomes reported. For key primary survey items, the chi-square test was conducted, and differences in relative frequencies of responses were computed along with confidence intervals.ResultsA total of 51,325 completed questionnaires were included in the analysis, pertaining to 1079 Naître et Grandir webpages (mean 48; range 1-637). Compared to parents, individuals in the entourage are more likely to report using the information in discussion with others (mean difference 0.166, 95% CI 0.155-0.176). Parents, on the other hand, were more likely than the entourage to report using the information to better understand (mean difference 0.084, 95% CI 0.073-0.094), to decide to do something (mean difference 0.156, 95% CI 0.146-0.166), or to do something in a different manner (mean difference 0.052, 95% CI 0.042-0.061). In addition, results suggest that the differences in perceived benefits of parenting information by the entourage depend on how they access the information. Respondents who were actively seeking the information (through the website) were more likely to report that the information would help them be less worried (mean difference 0.047; 95% CI 0.024-0.069), handle a problem (mean difference 0.083; 95% CI 0.062-0.104), and decide what to do with someone else (mean difference 0.040, 95% CI 0.020-0.058). Respondents who passively acquired the information (through the newsletter) were more likely to report that the information would help improve the health or well-being of a child (mean difference 0.090; 95% CI 0.067-0.112).ConclusionsBy better understanding how consumers and their entourages use information, information providers can adapt information to meet both individual and group needs, and health care practitioners can target patients' entourages with web-based health information resources for dissemination and use.

Dataset Information

Sepsis information-seeking behaviors via Wikipedia between 2015 and 2018: A mixed methods retrospective observational study.

Publications

Sepsis information-seeking behaviors via Wikipedia between 2015 and 2018: A mixed methods retrospective observational study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets