COVID-19 Vaccine Information and Infertility Posts on X: Insights on a Misinformation Pandemic.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate misinformation surrounding infertility and the COVID-19 vaccine on X (formerly known as Twitter) by analyzing the prevalence and content of this misinformation across a sample of posts on X. METHODS: This study is a retrospective review of posts on X (formerly known as tweets) from the COVID-19-TweetIDs dataset from July 2021 and November 2021. Included posts were from crucial time points in the COVID-19 vaccine discourse and contained at least one word related to COVID-19 vaccination and fertility. Posts were analyzed and categorized based on factuality, common words, and hashtags. Descriptive statistics on total followers, account verification status, and engagement were obtained. Differences between posts on X classified as factual and misinformation were examined using analysis of variance or χ2 tests. Sentiment analysis determined if post content was generally positive, neutral, or negative. RESULTS: A total of 17,418 relevant posts on X were reviewed: 11,436 from timeframe 1 (July 2021) and 5982 from timeframe 2 (December 2021). Misinformation posts rose from 29.9% in July 2021 to 45.1% in November 2021. In both timeframes, accounts sharing factual information had more followers (p < 0.001), and verified users were more likely to share accurate posts (p ≤ 0.001). Factual and misinformation posts had similar engagement. Sentiment analysis identified that real posts were more positive and misinformation posts were more negative (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Misinformation about the COVID-19 vaccine and fertility is highly prevalent on X and threatens vaccine uptake in patients desiring future fertility. Accounts sharing factual information were likely to have more followers and be verified; therefore, verifying more physicians sharing accurate information is critical.

Prevalence and quality of medical Spanish education in US osteopathic medical schools: a national survey.

CONTEXT: Spanish is the language in the United States with the greatest language-concordant physician deficit. Allopathic medical Spanish programs have proliferated, but the national prevalence of medical Spanish education at osteopathic medical schools has never been evaluated. OBJECTIVES: The objectives of this study are to describe the medical Spanish educational landscape at US osteopathic schools and evaluate program adherence to previously established basic standards. METHODS: Between March and October 2022, surveys were sent to all 44 member schools of the American Association of Colleges of Osteopathic Medicine (AACOM). For nonrespondents, data were obtained from publicly available websites. Primary surveys were sent to deans or diversity, equity, and inclusion officers at each osteopathic school to determine whether medical Spanish was offered and to identify a medical Spanish leader. Medical Spanish leaders received the secondary survey. The main measures of this study were the prevalence of medical Spanish programs at osteopathic schools and the extent to which existing programs met each of the four basic standards: having a faculty educator, providing a curricular structure, assessing learner skills, and awarding institutional course credit. RESULTS: We gathered medical Spanish information from 90.9 % (40/44) of osteopathic schools. Overall, 88.6 % (39/44) offered medical Spanish, of which 66.7 % (26/39) had formal curricula, 43.6 % (17/39) had faculty educators, 17.9 % (7/39) assessed learner skills, and 28.2 % (11/39) provided course credit. Only 12.8 % (5/39) of osteopathic schools with medical Spanish programs met all basic standards. Urban/suburban schools were likelier to offer medical Spanish than rural schools (p=0.020). Osteopathic schools in states with the highest Spanish-speaking populations were more likely to offer student-run initiatives (p=0.027). CONCLUSIONS: Most osteopathic schools provide medical Spanish education, but work is needed to improve consistency, quality, and sustainability. Future research should focus on osteopathic student language proficiency assessment, improve medical Spanish accessibility for students at rural programs, and explore the unique content areas of osteopathic medical Spanish education.