评估新冠肺炎大流行对泌尿外科住院比赛中社交媒体使用和影响的影响:文献综述

Brent Yelton, Shivam Patel, Andrew Shanholtzer, B. Walter, S. M. Jafri
{"title":"评估新冠肺炎大流行对泌尿外科住院比赛中社交媒体使用和影响的影响:文献综述","authors":"Brent Yelton, Shivam Patel, Andrew Shanholtzer, B. Walter, S. M. Jafri","doi":"10.3389/fruro.2022.1005166","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Social media (SoMe) use within healthcare has changed significantly since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic. This project highlights recent changes in SoMe use within the field of urology and summarizes how they have impacted the urology residency application and match process. A literature review of the PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, Scopus, PsycINFO, and Web of Science databases was performed on March 19th, 2022 for relevant studies regarding the use of SoMe in the American urology residency application and match process. Articles not published in English, published prior to 2019, or focusing on residency matches outside of the United States were excluded. The initial search yielded 202 unique results, of which, after independent review, a total of nine texts were deemed appropriate for analysis. Of the nine sources, six were peer-reviewed articles, two were published conference abstracts which included data, and one was a research letter. These studies consistently found that both urology applicants and residency programs increased their SoMe use following the start of the COVID-19 pandemic as the percentage of programs (26-50% to 51-75%) and percentage of applicants (44% to 80%) participating in SoMe for professional purposes increased from 2018-2019 to 2021. Notably, Twitter was the most popular SoMe platform used. Among urology applicants, 43-61% found SoMe to have the greatest utility in providing information about specific programs. There was also consistency between studies in finding that SoMe use played a minimal role in whether or not a student matched, as only 3-6% of program directors reviewed applicants’ SoMe during the application and match process, while as many as 80% reported that SoMe had no role in the assessment of applicants. With programs continuing to see SoMe as a method of reaching out to applicants, increases in usage will likely continue even after the COVID-19 pandemic ends. In turn, it will become increasingly important for students to be mindful of how and what they post on SoMe. Continuing to analyze and reevaluate the benefits and drawbacks of these SoMe tools will remain important as virtual interactions become increasingly relevant to the field of urology.","PeriodicalId":73113,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in urology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evaluating the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on the use and impact of social media in the urology residency match: A review of the literature\",\"authors\":\"Brent Yelton, Shivam Patel, Andrew Shanholtzer, B. Walter, S. M. Jafri\",\"doi\":\"10.3389/fruro.2022.1005166\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Social media (SoMe) use within healthcare has changed significantly since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic. This project highlights recent changes in SoMe use within the field of urology and summarizes how they have impacted the urology residency application and match process. A literature review of the PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, Scopus, PsycINFO, and Web of Science databases was performed on March 19th, 2022 for relevant studies regarding the use of SoMe in the American urology residency application and match process. Articles not published in English, published prior to 2019, or focusing on residency matches outside of the United States were excluded. The initial search yielded 202 unique results, of which, after independent review, a total of nine texts were deemed appropriate for analysis. Of the nine sources, six were peer-reviewed articles, two were published conference abstracts which included data, and one was a research letter. These studies consistently found that both urology applicants and residency programs increased their SoMe use following the start of the COVID-19 pandemic as the percentage of programs (26-50% to 51-75%) and percentage of applicants (44% to 80%) participating in SoMe for professional purposes increased from 2018-2019 to 2021. Notably, Twitter was the most popular SoMe platform used. Among urology applicants, 43-61% found SoMe to have the greatest utility in providing information about specific programs. There was also consistency between studies in finding that SoMe use played a minimal role in whether or not a student matched, as only 3-6% of program directors reviewed applicants’ SoMe during the application and match process, while as many as 80% reported that SoMe had no role in the assessment of applicants. With programs continuing to see SoMe as a method of reaching out to applicants, increases in usage will likely continue even after the COVID-19 pandemic ends. In turn, it will become increasingly important for students to be mindful of how and what they post on SoMe. Continuing to analyze and reevaluate the benefits and drawbacks of these SoMe tools will remain important as virtual interactions become increasingly relevant to the field of urology.\",\"PeriodicalId\":73113,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Frontiers in urology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-12-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Frontiers in urology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3389/fruro.2022.1005166\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in urology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/fruro.2022.1005166","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

自新冠肺炎大流行开始以来,医疗保健领域的社交媒体(SoMe)使用发生了重大变化。该项目强调了泌尿外科领域SoMe使用的最新变化,并总结了它们如何影响泌尿外科住院申请和匹配过程。2022年3月19日,对PubMed、Embase、Cochrane、Scopus、PsycINFO和Web of Science数据库进行了文献综述,以了解有关SoMe在美国泌尿外科住院申请和匹配过程中使用的相关研究。未以英语发表、在2019年之前发表或关注美国境外居留权匹配的文章被排除在外。最初的搜索产生了202个独特的结果,经过独立审查,共有9个文本被认为适合分析。在九个来源中,六个是同行评审的文章,两个是包含数据的会议摘要,一个是研究信。这些研究一致发现,在新冠肺炎大流行开始后,泌尿外科申请者和住院治疗计划都增加了SoMe的使用,因为从2018-2019年到2021年,出于专业目的参与SoMe的计划百分比(26-50%到51-75%)和申请者百分比(44%到80%)都有所增加。值得注意的是,Twitter是最受欢迎的SoMe平台。在泌尿科申请人中,43-61%的人认为SoMe在提供特定项目的信息方面最有用。研究之间也存在一致性,发现SoMe的使用对学生是否匹配起到了最小的作用,因为只有3-6%的项目主管在申请和匹配过程中审查了申请人的SoMe,而多达80%的人表示SoMe在评估申请人中没有作用。随着项目继续将SoMe视为接触申请人的一种方法,即使在新冠肺炎大流行结束后,使用量也可能继续增加。反过来,对学生来说,注意他们在SoMe上发布的方式和内容将变得越来越重要。随着虚拟交互与泌尿外科领域的相关性越来越大,继续分析和重新评估这些SoMe工具的优点和缺点仍然很重要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Evaluating the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on the use and impact of social media in the urology residency match: A review of the literature
Social media (SoMe) use within healthcare has changed significantly since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic. This project highlights recent changes in SoMe use within the field of urology and summarizes how they have impacted the urology residency application and match process. A literature review of the PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, Scopus, PsycINFO, and Web of Science databases was performed on March 19th, 2022 for relevant studies regarding the use of SoMe in the American urology residency application and match process. Articles not published in English, published prior to 2019, or focusing on residency matches outside of the United States were excluded. The initial search yielded 202 unique results, of which, after independent review, a total of nine texts were deemed appropriate for analysis. Of the nine sources, six were peer-reviewed articles, two were published conference abstracts which included data, and one was a research letter. These studies consistently found that both urology applicants and residency programs increased their SoMe use following the start of the COVID-19 pandemic as the percentage of programs (26-50% to 51-75%) and percentage of applicants (44% to 80%) participating in SoMe for professional purposes increased from 2018-2019 to 2021. Notably, Twitter was the most popular SoMe platform used. Among urology applicants, 43-61% found SoMe to have the greatest utility in providing information about specific programs. There was also consistency between studies in finding that SoMe use played a minimal role in whether or not a student matched, as only 3-6% of program directors reviewed applicants’ SoMe during the application and match process, while as many as 80% reported that SoMe had no role in the assessment of applicants. With programs continuing to see SoMe as a method of reaching out to applicants, increases in usage will likely continue even after the COVID-19 pandemic ends. In turn, it will become increasingly important for students to be mindful of how and what they post on SoMe. Continuing to analyze and reevaluate the benefits and drawbacks of these SoMe tools will remain important as virtual interactions become increasingly relevant to the field of urology.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Reducing time from presentation to surgical intervention for testicular torsion: implementation of a quality improvement protocol Clinical and environmental considerations for neonatal, office-based circumcisions compared with operative circumcisions Case report: Para-testicular spindle cell lipoma suspected of well-differentiated liposarcoma Lights and shadows on local recurrence after renal surgery: when, why and how to manage Long-term follow-up results of prostate capsule-sparing and nerve-sparing radical cystectomy with neobladder: a single-center retrospective analysis
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1