Do social media campaigns foster vaccination adherence? A systematic review of prior intervention-based campaigns on social media.

The COVID-19 pandemic has demonstrated the importance of large-scale campaigns to facilitate vaccination adherence. Social media presents unique opportunities to reach broader audiences and reduces the costs of conducting national or global campaigns aimed at achieving herd immunity. Nonetheless, few studies have reviewed the effectiveness of prior social media campaigns for vaccination adherence, and several prior studies have shown that social media campaigns do not increase uptake rates. Hence, our objective is to conduct a systematic review to examine the effectiveness of social media campaigns and to identify the reasons for the mixed results of prior studies. Our methodology began with a search of seven databases, which resulted in the identification of 92 interventions conducted over digital media. Out of these 92 studies, only 15 adopted social media campaigns for immunization. We analyzed these 15 studies, along with a coding scheme we developed based on reviews of both health interventions and social media campaigns. Multiple coders, who were knowledgeable about social media campaigns and healthcare, analyzed the 15 cases and obtained an acceptable level of inter-coder reliability (> .80). The results from our systematic review show that only a few social media campaigns have succeeded in enhancing vaccination adherence. In addition, few campaigns have utilized known critical success factors of social media to induce vaccination adherence. Based on these findings, we discuss a set of research questions that informatics scholars should consider when identifying opportunities for using social media to resolve one of the most resilient challenges in public health. Finally, we conclude by discussing how the insights drawn from our systematic reviews contribute to advancing theories, such as social influence and the health belief model, into the realm of social media-based health interventions.

Characterizing the use of class rank in evaluating applicants for veterinary internship and residency positions.

OBJECTIVE: To characterize how class rank and other criteria are used to evaluate applicants for veterinary internship and residency positions. SAMPLE: Program directors for 572 internship and residency programs. PROCEDURES: A survey was sent to program directors asking them to score the importance of 7 items (cover letter, letters of reference, curriculum vitae, veterinary class rank, grade point average, grades for classes specifically related to the internship or residency specialty area, and interview) they could use in evaluating applicants for an internship or residency and to rank those 7 items, along with an open item asking participants to list other criteria they used, from most to least important. RESULTS: Responses were obtained for 195 internship and 222 residency programs. For both internship programs and residency programs, mean importance scores assigned to the 7 items resulted in the same ordering from most to least important, with letters of reference, interview, curriculum vitae, and cover letter most important. Rankings of the importance of the 7 items, along with an "other" item, were similar for internship and residency programs; the most important item was a candidate's letters of reference, followed by the interview, cover letter, and curriculum vitae. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Results suggested that although most veterinary internship and residency programs consider class rank and overall grade point average when evaluating applicants, these 2 items were not the most important. For both internship and residency programs, the most important items were an applicant's letters of reference, followed by the interview, cover letter, and curriculum vitae. (J Am Vet Med Assoc 2021;258:776-785).

Barriers for Telemedicine Use Among Nonusers at the Beginning of the Pandemic.

Telemedicine has garnered considerably more attention during the COVID-19 pandemic than in any time previously. However, before the beginning of the pandemic, many individuals had not accessed care in this manner. The purpose of this study was to understand the central reasons that individuals had not used telemedicine before the pandemic. Therefore, we conducted a convenience sample survey in March-April 2020, and 539 participants living in the United States answered questions about exploring their reasons for not having used telemedicine. Descriptive statistics and correlations were conducted to analyze the data. Two themes emerged from these data, including the importance of the patient-provider relationship and that access to technology was not the issue for this particular population. Although technology was not a barrier, many, specifically older participants, had concerns over privacy and security. As the world gains some control over the COVID-19 pandemic and medical appointments begin to return to a new normal, the implication for the continued use of telemedicine is still important to address as this will become a standard of care.