Project description:BackgroundThere is scant insight into the presence of nuclear medicine (NM) and nuclear radiology (NR) programs on social media.ObjectiveOur purpose was to assess Twitter engagement by academic NM/NR programs in the United States.MethodsWe measured Twitter engagement by the academic NM/NR community, accounting for various NM/NR certification pathways. The Twitter presence of NM/NR programs at both the department and program director level was identified. Tweets by programs were cross-referenced against potential high-yield NM- or NR-related hashtags, and tabulated at a binary level. A brief survey was done to identify obstacles and benefits to Twitter use by academic NM/NR faculty.ResultsFor 2019-2020, 88 unique programs in the United States offered NM/NR certification pathways. Of these, 52% (46/88) had Twitter accounts and 24% (21/88) had at least one post related to NM/NR. Only three radiology departments had unique Twitter accounts for the NM/molecular imaging division. Of the other 103 diagnostic radiology residency programs, only 16% (16/103) had a presence on Twitter and 5% (5/103) had tweets about NM/NR. Only 9% (8/88) of NM/NR program directors were on Twitter, and three program directors tweeted about NM/NR. The survey revealed a lack of clarity and resources around using Twitter, although respondents acknowledged the perceived value of Twitter engagement for attracting younger trainees.ConclusionsCurrently, there is minimal Twitter engagement by the academic NM/NR community. The perceived value of Twitter engagement is counterbalanced by identifiable obstacles. Given radiologists' overall positive views of social media's usefulness, scant social media engagement by the NM community may represent a missed opportunity. More Twitter engagement and further research by trainees and colleagues should be encouraged, as well as the streamlined use of unique hashtags.
Project description:Background: The COVID-19 pandemic caused significant disruptions in international communications and travel for academic global health programs (AGHPs) in both high-income countries (HICs) and low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Given the importance of international travel and communication to AGHPs, the pandemic has likely had considerable impact on the education, research, and administrative components of these programs. To date, no substantive study has determined the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on AGHPs in HICs and LMICs. This study assessed the impacts and resultant adaptations of AGHPs to pandemic realities with the goal of sharing strategies and approaches. Methods: This study applied a mixed methods sequential explanatory design to survey AGHPs in HICs and LMICs about the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on three program domains: education, research, and administration. First, we surveyed a range of AGHP stakeholders to capture quantitative data on the pandemic’s impact. Subsequently we conducted semi-structured interviews with select survey participants to gather qualitative data expanding on specific survey responses. Data from both phases were then compared and interpreted together to develop conclusions and suggest adaptive/innovative approaches for AGHPs. Results: AGHPs in both HICs and LMICs were significantly impacted by the pandemic in all three domains, though in different ways. While education initiatives managed to adapt by pivoting towards virtual learning, research programs were impacted more negatively by the disruptions in communication and international travel. The impact of the pandemic on scholarly output as well as on funding for education and research was quite variable, although LMIC programs were more negatively impacted. Administratively, AGHPs implemented a range of safety and risk mitigation strategies and showed a low risk tolerance for international travel. The pandemic posed many challenges but also revealed opportunities for AGHPs. Conclusions: The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted AGHPs in HICs and LMICs in expected and unexpected ways. Programs noted some unanticipated reductions in education program funding, negative impacts on research programs, and reduced scholarly output. Many programs reported well-coordinated adaptive responses to the pandemic including, for instance, virtual (in place of in-person) collaboration in research. The pandemic will likely have lasting impacts with regard to education, research collaborations, and administration of programs.
Project description:To explore the impact of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic on the training experience of urology residents in Indonesia. A cross-sectional study using a web-based questionnaire (SurveyMonkey) involved all registered urology residents in Indonesia. The questionnaire was structured in Bahasa Indonesia, consisted of 28 questions, and divided into three sections: Demographic characteristics, current daily activities, and opinions regarding training experiences during the COVID-19 outbreak. The survey was distributed to all respondents via chief of residents in each urology center from May 26, 2020 to Jun 2, 2020. Of the total 247 registered urology residents, 243 were eligible for the study. The response and completeness rate for this study were 243/243 (100%). The median age of respondents was 30 (24-38) years old, and 92.2% of them were male. Among them, 6 (2.5%) respondents were confirmed as COVID-19 positive. A decrease in residents' involvement in clinical and surgical activities was distinguishable in endourological and open procedures. Most educational activities were switched to web-based video conferences (WVC), while others opted for the in-person method. Smart learning methods, such as joining a national/international speaker webinar or watching a recorded video, were used by 93.8% and 80.7% of the respondents, respectively. The respondents thought that educational activities using WVC and smart learning methods were effective methods of learning. Overall, the respondents felt unsure whether training experience during the COVID-19 pandemic was comparable to before the respective period. The COVID-19 pandemic negatively affected urology residents' training experience. However, it also opened up new possibilities for incorporating new learning methodologies in the future.
Project description:The COVID-19 pandemic swept across the world, altering the structure and existence of graduate medical education programs across all disciplines. Orthopaedic residency programs can adapt during these unprecedented times to continue providing meaningful education to trainees and to continue providing high-quality patient care, all while keeping both residents and patients safe from disease. The purpose of this review was to evaluate the literature and describe evidence-based changes that can be made in an orthopaedic residency program to ensure patient and resident safety while sustaining the principles of graduate medical education during the COVID-19 pandemic. We describe measures that can be enacted now or during future pandemics, including workforce and occupational modifications, personal protective equipment, telemedicine, online didactic education, resident wellness, return to elective surgery, and factors affecting medical students and fellows. After a review of these strategies, programs can make changes for sustainable improvements and adapt to be ready for second-wave events or future pandemics.Level of evidenceLevel V.
Project description:IntroductionPostgraduate education is transitioning to a competency-based curriculum in an effort to standardize the quality of graduating trainees. The learning experiences and opportunities in each institution are likely variable, as no standard exists regarding the teaching curriculum offered through residency. The objective of this study is to examine the various teaching curricula among different Canadian urology residency programs and to identify which teaching modalities are prioritized by program directors.MethodsA 10-question anonymous survey was sent electronically to program directors at all 12 urology residency programs across Canada. Questions were designed to quantify the time allotted for teaching and to assess the various teaching session types prioritized by programs to ensure the successful training of their graduates. We assessed each program's perceived value of written exams, oral exams, didactic teaching session, and simulation sessions. Responses were assessed using a Likert-scale and a ranking format. Descriptive statistics were performed.ResultsOverall survey response rate from residency program directors was 75% (9/12). Sixty-seven percent of programs designated one day of teaching per week, whereas 33% split resident teaching over two days. Review of chapters directly from Campbell-Walsh Urology textbook were deemed the most valuable teaching session. Practice oral exams were also prioritized, whereas most programs felt that simulation labs contributed the least to residency education. All programs included review of the core urology textbook in their weekly teaching, while only 67% of programs included faculty-led didactic sessions and case presentations. Forty-four percent of programs included resident-led didactic sessions. Practice oral exams and simulation labs were the least commonly included teaching modalities.ConclusionsAlthough most program directors prioritize the review of chapters in the core urology textbook, we found significant heterogeneity in the teaching sessions prioritized and offered in current urology residency curricula. As we move to standardize the quality of graduating trainees, understanding the impact of variable educational opportunities on residency training may become increasingly important.
Project description:BackgroundWith the World Health Organization's pandemic declaration and government-initiated actions against coronavirus disease (COVID-19), sentiments surrounding COVID-19 have evolved rapidly.ObjectiveThis study aimed to examine worldwide trends of four emotions-fear, anger, sadness, and joy-and the narratives underlying those emotions during the COVID-19 pandemic.MethodsOver 20 million social media twitter posts made during the early phases of the COVID-19 outbreak from January 28 to April 9, 2020, were collected using "wuhan," "corona," "nCov," and "covid" as search keywords.ResultsPublic emotions shifted strongly from fear to anger over the course of the pandemic, while sadness and joy also surfaced. Findings from word clouds suggest that fears around shortages of COVID-19 tests and medical supplies became increasingly widespread discussion points. Anger shifted from xenophobia at the beginning of the pandemic to discourse around the stay-at-home notices. Sadness was highlighted by the topics of losing friends and family members, while topics related to joy included words of gratitude and good health.ConclusionsOverall, global COVID-19 sentiments have shown rapid evolutions within just the span of a few weeks. Findings suggest that emotion-driven collective issues around shared public distress experiences of the COVID-19 pandemic are developing and include large-scale social isolation and the loss of human lives. The steady rise of societal concerns indicated by negative emotions needs to be monitored and controlled by complementing regular crisis communication with strategic public health communication that aims to balance public psychological wellbeing.
Project description:PurposeDuring medical residency programs, physicians develop their professional identities as specialists and encounter high expectations in terms of achieving competencies. The responsibilities of medical trainees include caring for patients, balancing work with personal life, and weathering stress, depression, and burnout. Formal academic mentoring programs strive to ease these burdens. The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has altered the trainee–academic mentor relationship, and solutions are needed to address these challenges. The present study aimed to evaluate the formal academic mentoring process through trainees’ perceptions and
Project description:The COVID-19 pandemic has impacted all aspects of our lives, including the information spread on social media. Prior literature has found that information diffusion dynamics on social networks mirror that of a virus, but applying the epidemic Susceptible-Infected-Removed model (SIR) model to examine how information spread is not sufficient to claim that information spreads like a virus. In this study, we explore whether there are similarities in the simulated SIR model (SIRsim), observed SIR model based on actual COVID-19 cases (SIRemp), and observed information cascades on Twitter about the virus (INFOcas) by using network analysis and diffusion modeling. We propose three primary research questions: (a) What are the diffusion patterns of COVID-19 virus spread, based on SIRsim and SIRemp? (b) What are the diffusion patterns of information cascades on Twitter (INFOcas), with respect to retweets, quote tweets, and replies? and (c) What are the major differences in diffusion patterns between SIRsim, SIRemp, and INFOcas? Our study makes a contribution to the information sciences community by showing how epidemic modeling of virus and information diffusion analysis of online social media are distinct but interrelated concepts.
Project description:ObjectiveTo determine the odds of accessing telemedicine either by phone or by video during the COVID-19 pandemic.MethodsWe performed a retrospective study of patients who were seen at a single academic institution for a urologic condition between March 15, 2020 and September 30, 2020. The primary outcome was to determine characteristics associated with participating in a telemedicine appointment (video or telephone) using logistic regression multivariable analysis. We used a backward model selection and variables that were least significant were removed. We adjusted for reason for visit, patient characteristics such as age, sex, ethnicity, race, reason for visit, preferred language, and insurance. Variables that were not significant that were removed from our final model included median income estimated by zip code, clinic location, provider age, provider sex, and provider training.ResultsWe reviewed 4234 visits: 1567 (37%) were telemedicine in the form of video 1402 (33.1%) or telephone 164 (3.8%). The cohort consisted of 2516 patients, Non-Hispanic White (n = 1789, 71.1%) and Hispanic (n = 417, 16.6%). We performed multivariable logistic regression analysis and demonstrated that patients who were Hispanic, older, or had Medicaid insurance were significantly less likely to access telemedicine during the pandemic. We did not identify differences in telemedicine utilization when stratifying providers by their age, sex, or training type (physician or advanced practice provider).ConclusionWe conclude that there are differences in the use of telemedicine and that this difference may compound existing disparities in care. Additionally, we identified that these differences were not associated with provider attributes. Further study is needed to overcome barriers in access to telemedicine.