- Browse by Author
Browsing by Author "Stewart, Nancy H."
Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
Results Per Page
Sort Options
Item Build It and They Shall Come: Medical Education Communities of Practice(American Thoracic Society, 2023-05-01) Kelm, Diana J.; Neumeier, Anna; Hinkle, Laura J.; Adamson, Rosemary; Heath, Janae K.; Stewart, Nancy H.; Niroula, Abesh; Chiarchiaro, Jared; Denson, Joshua L.; Holden, Van K.; Soffler, Morgan; Carlos, W. Graham; Medicine, School of MedicineBackground: Producing scholarship in education is essential to the career development of a clinician-educator. Challenges to scholarly production include a lack of resources, time, expertise, and collaborators. Objective: To develop communities of practice for education scholarship through an international society to increase community and academic productivity. Methods: We developed multi-institutional scholarship pods within the American Thoracic Society through the creation of a working group (2017-2019). Pods met virtually, and meetings were goal focused to advance education scholarship within their area of interest. To understand the impact of these scholarship pods, we surveyed pod leaders and members in 2021 and analyzed the academic productivity of each pod via a survey of pod leaders and a review of the PubMed index. Results: Nine pods were created, each with an assigned educational topic. The survey had a response rate of 76.6%. The perceived benefits were the opportunity to meet colleagues with similar interests at other institutions, production of scholarly work, and engagement in new experiences. The main challenges were difficulty finding times to meet because of competing clinical demands and aligning times among pod members. Regarding academic productivity, eight publications, four conference presentations, and one webinar/podcast were produced by six of the nine pods. Conclusion: The development of communities of practice resulted in increased multi-site collaboration, with boosted academic productivity as well as an enhanced sense of belonging. Multiple challenges remain but can likely be overcome with accountability, early discussion of roles and expectations, and clear delegation of tasks and authorship.Item Understanding the “Social” in “Social Media”. An Analysis of Twitter Engagement of Pulmonary and Critical Care Fellowship Programs(American Thoracic Society, 2021-04-23) Gandotra, Sheetal; Stewart, Nancy H.; Khateeb, Dina; Garcha, Puneet; Carlos, W. Graham; Carroll, Christopher L.; Kaul, Viren; Medicine, School of MedicineBackground: Social media is ubiquitous as a tool for collaboration, networking, and dissemination. However, little is known about use of social media platforms by pulmonary and critical care medicine fellowship programs. Objective: We identify and characterize pulmonary and critical care fellowship programs using Twitter and Instagram, as well as the posting behaviors of their social media accounts. Methods: We identified all adult and pediatric pulmonary, critical care medicine (CCM), and combined pulmonary and critical care medicine (PCCM) programs in the United States using the Electronic Residency Application Service. We searched for Twitter profiles for each program between January 1, 2018, and September 30, 2018. Tweets and Twitter interactions were classified into the following three types: social, clinical, or medical education (MedEd) related. We collected data about content enhancements of tweets, including the use of pictures, graphics interchange format or videos, hashtags, links, and tagging other accounts. The types of tweets, content enhancement characteristics, and measures of engagement were analyzed for association with number of followers. Results: We assessed 341 programs, including 163 PCCM, 36 adult CCM, 20 adult pulmonary, 67 pediatric CCM, and 55 pediatric pulmonary programs. Thirty-three (10%) programs had Twitter accounts. Of 1,903 tweets by 33 of the 341 programs with Twitter accounts, 476 (25%) were MedEd related, 733 (39%) were clinical, and 694 (36%) were social. The median rate of tweets per month was 1.65 (interquartile range [IQR], 0.4-6.65), with 55% programs tweeting more than monthly. Accounts tweeting more often had significantly more followers than those tweeting less frequently (median, 240 followers; 25-75% IQR, 164-388 vs. median, 107 followers; 25-75% IQR, 13-188; P = 0.006). Higher engagement with clinical and social Twitter interactions (tweets, retweets, likes, and comments) was associated with more followers but not for the MedEd-related Twitter interactions. All types of content enhancements (pictures, graphics interchange format/videos, links, and tagging) were associated with a higher number of followers, except for hashtags. Conclusion: Despite the steadily increasing use of social media in medicine, only 10% of the pulmonary and critical care fellowship programs in the United States have Twitter accounts. Social and clinical content appears to gain traction online; however, additional evaluation is needed on how to effectively engage audiences with MedEd content.