Reader engagement with medical content on Wikipedia.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Maggio LA
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7089765 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Mar
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Reader engagement with medical content on Wikipedia.
Maggio Lauren A LA Steinberg Ryan M RM Piccardi Tiziano T Willinsky John M JM
eLife 20200306
Articles on Wikipedia about health and medicine are maintained by WikiProject Medicine (WPM), and are widely used by health professionals, students and others. We have compared these articles, and reader engagement with them, to other articles on Wikipedia. We found that WPM articles are longer, possess a greater density of external links, and are visited more often than other articles on Wikipedia. Readers of WPM articles are more likely to hover over and view footnotes than other readers, but ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:Indicators that rank countries according socioeconomic measurements are important tools for regional development and political reform. Those currently in widespread use are sometimes criticized for a lack of reproducibility or the inability to compare values over time, necessitating simple, fast and systematic measures. Here, we applied the 'guilt by association' principle often used in biological networks to the information network within the online encyclopedia Wikipedia to create an indicator quantifying the degree to which pages linked to a country are disputed by contributors. The indicator correlates with metrics of governance, political or economic stability about as well as they correlate with each other, and though faster and simpler, it is remarkably stable over time despite constant changes in the underlying disputes. For some countries, changes over a four year period appear to correlate with world events related to conflicts or economic problems.
| S-EPMC3120813 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Medical students commonly refer to Wikipedia as their preferred online resource for medical information. The quality and readability of articles about common vascular disorders on Wikipedia has not been evaluated or compared against a standard textbook of surgery. OBJECTIVE:The aims of this study were to (1) compare the quality of Wikipedia articles to that of equivalent chapters in a standard undergraduate medical textbook of surgery, (2) identify any errors of omission in either resource, and (3) compare the readability of both resources using validated ease-of-reading and grade-level tools. METHODS:Using the Medical Council of Canada Objectives for the Qualifying Examination, 8 fundamental topics of vascular surgery were chosen. The articles were found on Wikipedia using Wikipedia's native search engine. The equivalent chapters were identified in Schwartz Principles of Surgery (ninth edition). Medical learners (n=2) assessed each of the texts on their original platforms to independently evaluate readability, quality, and errors of omission. Readability was evaluated with Flesch Reading Ease scores and 5 grade-level scores (Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level, Gunning Fog Index, Coleman-Liau Index, Simple Measure of Gobbledygook Index, and Automated Readability Index), quality was evaluated using the DISCERN instrument, and errors of omission were evaluated using a standardized scoring system that was designed by the authors. RESULTS:Flesch Reading Ease scores suggested that Wikipedia (mean 30.5; SD 8.4) was significantly easier to read (P=.03) than Schwartz (mean 20.2; SD 9.0). The mean grade level (calculated using all grade-level indices) of the Wikipedia articles (mean 14.2; SD 1.3) was significantly different (P=.02) than the mean grade level of Schwartz (mean 15.9; SD 1.4). The quality of the text was also assessed using the DISCERN instrument and suggested that Schwartz (mean 71.4; SD 3.1) had a significantly higher quality (P=.002) compared to that of Wikipedia (mean 52.9; SD 11.4). Finally, the Wikipedia error of omission rate (mean 12.5; SD 6.8) was higher than that of Schwartz (mean 21.3; SD 1.9) indicating that there were significantly fewer errors of omission in the surgical textbook (P=.008). CONCLUSIONS:Online resources are increasingly easier to access but can vary in quality. Based on this comparison, the authors of this study recommend the use of vascular surgery textbooks as a primary source of learning material because the information within is more consistent in quality and has fewer errors of omission. Wikipedia can be a useful resource for quick reference, particularly because of its ease of reading, but its vascular surgery articles require further development.
| S-EPMC7334757 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Wikipedia has quickly become one of the most frequently accessed encyclopedic references, despite the ease with which content can be changed and the potential for 'edit wars' surrounding controversial topics. Little is known about how this potential for controversy affects the accuracy and stability of information on scientific topics, especially those with associated political controversy. Here we present an analysis of the Wikipedia edit histories for seven scientific articles and show that topics we consider politically but not scientifically "controversial" (such as evolution and global warming) experience more frequent edits with more words changed per day than pages we consider "noncontroversial" (such as the standard model in physics or heliocentrism). For example, over the period we analyzed, the global warming page was edited on average (geometric mean ±SD) 1.9±2.7 times resulting in 110.9±10.3 words changed per day, while the standard model in physics was only edited 0.2±1.4 times resulting in 9.4±5.0 words changed per day. The high rate of change observed in these pages makes it difficult for experts to monitor accuracy and contribute time-consuming corrections, to the possible detriment of scientific accuracy. As our society turns to Wikipedia as a primary source of scientific information, it is vital we read it critically and with the understanding that the content is dynamic and vulnerable to vandalism and other shenanigans.
| S-EPMC4537301 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundWikipedia, the multilingual encyclopedia, was founded in 2001 and is the world's largest and most visited online general reference website. It is widely used by health care professionals and students. The inclusion of journal articles in Wikipedia is of scholarly interest, but the time taken for a journal article to be included in Wikipedia, from the moment of its publication to its incorporation into Wikipedia, is unclear.ObjectiveWe aimed to determine the ranking of the most cited journals by their representation in the English-language medical pages of Wikipedia. In addition, we evaluated the number of days between publication of journal articles and their citation in Wikipedia medical pages, treating this measure as a proxy for the information-diffusion rate.MethodsWe retrieved the dates when articles were included in Wikipedia and the date of journal publication from Crossref by using an application programming interface.ResultsFrom 11,325 Wikipedia medical articles, we identified citations to 137,889 journal articles from over 15,000 journals. There was a large spike in the number of journal articles published in or after 2002 that were cited by Wikipedia. The higher the importance of a Wikipedia article, the higher was the mean number of journal citations it contained (top article, 48.13 [SD 33.67]; lowest article, 6.44 [SD 9.33]). However, the importance of the Wikipedia article did not affect the speed of reference addition. The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews was the most cited journal by Wikipedia, followed by The New England Journal of Medicine and The Lancet. The multidisciplinary journals Nature, Science, and the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences were among the top 10 journals with the highest Wikipedia medical article citations. For the top biomedical journal papers cited in Wikipedia's medical pages in 2016-2017, it took about 90 days (3 months) for the citation to be used in Wikipedia.ConclusionsWe found evidence of "recentism," which refers to preferential citation of recently published journal articles in Wikipedia. Traditional high-impact medical and multidisciplinary journals were extensively cited by Wikipedia, suggesting that Wikipedia medical articles have robust underpinnings. In keeping with the Wikipedia policy of citing reviews/secondary sources in preference to primary sources, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews was the most referenced journal.
| S-EPMC6356187 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Wikipedia contains rich biomedical information that can support medical informatics studies and applications. Identifying the subset of medical articles of Wikipedia has many benefits, such as facilitating medical knowledge extraction, serving as a corpus for language modeling, or simply making the size of data easy to work with. However, due to the extremely low prevalence of medical articles in the entire Wikipedia, articles identified by generic text classifiers would be bloated by irrelevant pages. To control the false discovery rate while maintaining a high recall, we developed a mechanism that leverages the rich page elements and the connected nature of Wikipedia and uses a crawling classification strategy to achieve accurate classification. Structured assertional knowledge in Infoboxes and Wikidata items associated with the identified medical articles were also extracted. This automatic mechanism is aimed to run periodically to update the results and share them with the informatics community.
| S-EPMC7357526 | biostudies-literature
Project description:INTRODUCTION:International medical electives, whereby undergraduates visit an institution in a country other than their own, are a common part of medical training. Visiting students are often asked to provide local teaching, which may be acceptable where the visitor is acting within the bounds of their own competency and the normal practices of both their home and host institutions. However, the extent to which teaching is an accepted student activity globally has not previously been described. This study aims to address this using an international survey approach. METHODS:A voluntary electronic survey, created using the Checklist for Reporting Results of Internet E-Surveys (CHERRIES) framework, was distributed across established international medical student networks. This assessed the involvement of medical students in teaching and the educator training they receive, with the intention of comparing experiences between high-income countries (HICs) and low/middle-income countries (LMICs) to gauge the engagement of both "host" and "visiting" students. RESULTS:443 students from 61 countries completed the survey, with an equal proportion of respondents from LMICs (49.4%, 219/443) and HICs (50.6%, 224/443). Around two thirds of students reported providing teaching whilst at medical school, with most reporting teaching numerous times a year, mainly to more junior medical students. There was with no significant difference between LMICs and HICs. Around 30 per cent of all medical students reported having received no teacher training, including 40 per cent of those already providing teaching. CONCLUSION:This study suggests that students are engaged in teaching globally, with no difference between HIC and LMIC contexts. However, students are underprepared to act as educators in both settings. Providing teaching as part of an elective experience may be ethically acceptable to both host and home institutions, but needs to be supported by formal training in delivering teaching.
| S-EPMC7039511 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The research compared the comprehensiveness and accuracy of two online resources that provide drug information: Lexicomp and Wikipedia.Medication information on five commonly prescribed medications was identified and comparisons were made between resources and the relevant literature. An initial content comparison of the following three categories of medication information was performed: dose and instructions, uses, and adverse effects or warnings. The content comparison included sixteen points of comparison for each of the five investigated medications, totaling eighty content comparisons. For each of the medications, adverse reactions that appeared in only one of the resources were identified. When primary, peer-reviewed literature was not referenced supporting the discrepant adverse reactions, a literature search was performed to determine whether or not evidence existed to support the listed claims.Lexicomp consistently provided more medication information, with information provided in 95.0% (76/80) of the content, compared to Wikipedia's 42.5% (34/80). Lexicomp and Wikipedia had information present in 91.4% (32/35) and 20.0% (7/35) of dosing and instructions content, respectively. Adverse effects or warning content was provided in 97.5% (39/40) of Lexicomp content and 55.0% (22/40) of Wikipedia content. The "uses" category was present in both Lexicomp and Wikipedia for the 5 medications considered. Of adverse reactions listed solely in Lexicomp, 191/302 (63.2%) were supported by primary, peer-reviewed literature in contrast to 7/7 (100.0%) of adverse reactions listed only in Wikipedia. A review of US Food and Drug Administration Prescribing Information and the Adverse Event Reporting System dashboard found support for a respective 17/102 (16.7%) and 92/102 (90.2%) of Lexicomp's adverse reactions that were not supported in the literature.Lexicomp is a comprehensive medication information tool that contains lists of adverse reactions that are not entirely supported by primary-peer reviewed literature.
| S-EPMC6013145 | biostudies-other
Project description:In this work we study the dynamical features of editorial wars in Wikipedia (WP). Based on our previously established algorithm, we build up samples of controversial and peaceful articles and analyze the temporal characteristics of the activity in these samples. On short time scales, we show that there is a clear correspondence between conflict and burstiness of activity patterns, and that memory effects play an important role in controversies. On long time scales, we identify three distinct developmental patterns for the overall behavior of the articles. We are able to distinguish cases eventually leading to consensus from those cases where a compromise is far from achievable. Finally, we analyze discussion networks and conclude that edit wars are mainly fought by few editors only.
| S-EPMC3380063 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The quest for information is one of the most common activity of human beings. Despite the the impressive progress of search engines, not to miss the needed piece of information could be still very tough, as well as to acquire specific competences and knowledge by shaping and following the proper learning paths. Indeed, the need to find sensible paths in information networks is one of the biggest challenges of our societies and, to effectively address it, it is important to investigate the strategies adopted by human users to cope with the cognitive bottleneck of finding their way in a growing sea of information. Here we focus on the case of Wikipedia and investigate a recently released dataset about users' click on the English Wikipedia, namely the English Wikipedia Clickstream. We perform a semantically charged analysis to uncover the general patterns followed by information seekers in the multi-dimensional space of Wikipedia topics/categories. We discover the existence of well defined strategies in which users tend to start from very general, i.e., semantically broad, pages and progressively narrow down the scope of their navigation, while keeping a growing semantic coherence. This is unlike strategies associated to tasks with predefined search goals, namely the case of the Wikispeedia game. In this case users first move from the 'particular' to the 'universal' before focusing down again to the required target. The clear picture offered here represents a very important stepping stone towards a better design of information networks and recommendation strategies, as well as the construction of radically new learning paths.
| S-EPMC5289465 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundSocial media offer a great opportunity to deliver smoking cessation treatment to young adults, but previous online and social media interventions targeting health behavior change have struggled with low participant engagement. We examined engagement generated by content based on the Transtheoretical Model of Behavior Change (TTM) in a motivationally tailored smoking cessation intervention on Facebook.ObjectiveThis study aimed to identify which intervention content based on the TTM (Decisional Balance and 10 processes of change) generated the highest engagement among participants in pre-action stages of change (Precontemplation, Contemplation, and Preparation).MethodsParticipants (N=79, 20% female, mean age 20.8) were assessed for readiness to quit smoking and assigned to one of 7 secret Facebook groups tailored to their stage of change. Daily postings to the groups based on TTM Decisional Balance and the 10 processes of change were made by research staff over 3 months. Engagement was operationalized as the number of participant comments to each post. TTM content-based predictors of number of comments were analyzed and stratified by baseline stage of change, using negative binomial regression analyses with and without zero inflation.ResultsA total of 512 TTM-based posts generated 630 individual comments. In Precontemplation and Contemplation groups, Decisional Balance posts generated above average engagement (P=.01 and P<.001). In Contemplation groups, posts based on the TTM processes Dramatic Relief and Self-Liberation resulted in below average engagement (P=.01 and P=.005). In Preparation groups, posts based on Consciousness Raising generated above average engagement (P=.009). Participant engagement decreased over time and differed between groups within Precontemplation and Contemplation stages, but was independent of day of the week and time of day the content was posted to the groups. No participant baseline characteristics significantly predicted engagement.ConclusionsParticipants not ready to quit in the next 30 days (in Precontemplation or Contemplation) engaged most when prompted to think about the pros and cons of behavior change, while those in the Preparation stage engaged most when posts increased awareness about smoking and smoking cessation. Findings support tailoring intervention content to readiness to quit and suggest intervention components that may be most effective in generating high participant engagement on social media.
| S-EPMC4704894 | biostudies-literature