Quality of male and female medical content on English-language Wikipedia:Quantitative content analysis

Background:Wikipedia is the largest free online encyclopedia and the seventh most visited website worldwide, containing >45,000 freely accessible English-language medical articles accessed nearly 1.6 billion times annually. Concerns have been expressed about the balance of content related to biological sex on Wikipedia.Objective:This study aims to categorize the top 1000 most-read (most popular) English-language Wikipedia health articles for June 2019 according to the relevance of the article topic to each sex and quality.Methods:In the first step, Wikipedia articles were identified using WikiProject Medicine Popular Pages. These were analyzed on 13 factors, including total views, article quality, and total number of references. In the second step, 2 general medical textbooks were used as comparators to assess whether Wikipedia’s spread of articles was typical compared to the general medical coverage. According to the article’s content, we proposed criteria with 5 categories: 1=“exclusively female,” 2=“predominantly female but can also affect male individuals,” 3=“not sex specific or neutral,” 4=predominantly male but can affect female individuals,” and 5=“exclusively male.”Results:Of the 1000 Wikipedia health articles, 933 (93.3%) were not sex specific and 67 (6.7%) were sex specific. There was no statistically significant difference in the number of reads per month between the sex-specific and non–sex-specific articles (P=.29). Coverage of female topics was higher (50/1000, 5%) than male topics (17/1000, 1.7%; this difference was also observed for the 2 medical textbooks, in which 90.2% (2330/2584) of content was not sex specific, female topics accounted for 8.1% (209/2584), and male topics for accounted for 1.7% (45/2584; statistically significant difference; Fisher exact test P=.03). Female-category articles were ranked higher on the Wikipedia medical topic importance list (top, high, or mid importance) than male-category articles (borderline statistical significance; Fisher exact test P=.05). Female articles had a higher number of total and unique references; a slightly higher number of page watchers, pictures, and available languages; and lower number of edits than male articles (all were statistically nonsignificant).Conclusions:Across several metrics, a sample of popular Wikipedia health-related articles for both sexes had comparable quality. Wikipedia had a lower number of female articles and a higher number of neutral articles relative to the 2 medical textbooks. These differences were small, but statistically significant. Higher exclusively female coverage, compared to exclusively male coverage, in Wikipedia articles was similar to the 2 medical textbooks and can be explained by inclusion of sections on obstetrics and gynecology. This is unlike the imbalance seen among biographies of living people, in which approximately 77.6% pertain to male individuals. Although this study included a small sample of articles, the spread of Wikipedia articles may reflect the readership and the population’s content consumption at a given time. Further study of a larger sample of Wikipedia articles would be valuable

Exploring the Impact of a Sleep App on Sleep Quality in a General Population Sample: Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial

Background: A third of adults in Western countries have impaired sleep quality. A possible solution involves distributing sleep aids through smartphone apps, but most empirical studies are limited to small pilot trials in distinct populations (eg, soldiers) or individuals with clinical sleep disorders; therefore, general population data are required. Furthermore, recent research shows that sleep app users desire a personalized approach, offering an individually tailored choice of techniques. One such aid is Peak Sleep, a smartphone app based on scientifically validated principles for improving sleep quality, such as mindfulness meditation and cognitive behavioral therapy. / Objective: We aimed to test the impact of the smartphone app Peak Sleep on sleep quality and collect user experience data to allow for future app development. / Methods: This was a 2-arm pilot randomized controlled trial. Participants were general population adults in the United Kingdom (aged ≥18 years) who were interested in improving their sleep quality and were not undergoing clinical treatment for sleep disorder or using sleep medication ≥1 per week. Participants were individually randomized to receive the intervention (3 months of app use) versus a no-treatment control. The intervention involved free access to Peak Sleep, an app that offered a choice of behavioral techniques to support better sleep (mindfulness, cognitive behavioral therapy, and acceptance commitment therapy). The primary outcome was sleep quality assessed using the Insomnia Severity Index at baseline and 1-, 2-, and 3-month follow-ups. Assessments were remote using web-based questionnaires. Objective sleep data collection using the Oura Ring (Ōura Health Oy) was planned; however, because the COVID-19 pandemic lockdowns began just after recruitment started, this plan could not be realized. Participant engagement with the app was assessed using the Digital Behavior Change Intervention Engagement Scale and qualitative telephone interviews with a subsample. / Results: A total of 101 participants were enrolled in the trial, and 21 (21%) were qualitatively interviewed. Sleep quality improved in both groups over time, with Insomnia Severity Index scores of the intervention group improving by a mean of 2.5 and the control group by a mean of 1.6 (between-group mean difference 0.9, 95% CI –2.0 to 3.8), with was no significant effect of group (P=.91). App users’ engagement was mixed, with qualitative interviews supporting the view of a polarized sample who either strongly liked or disliked the app. / Conclusions: In this trial, self-reported sleep improved over time in both intervention and control arms, with no impact by group, suggesting no effect of the sleep app. Qualitative data suggested polarized views on liking or not liking the app, features that people engaged with, and areas for improvement. Future work could involve developing the app features and then testing the app using objective measures of sleep in a larger sample. /\ud Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04487483; https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT0448748

The relationship between age and sex partner counts during the mpox outbreak in the UK, 2022

BACKGROUND: Understanding the dynamics of an infectious disease outbreak linked to sexual activity requires valid expectations of likely counts of unique sex partners during the infectious period. Typically, age is the key demographic trait linked to expected partner count, with many transmission models removing adults from the sexually active pool abruptly at a pre-specified age threshold. Modelling the rate of decline in partner counts with age would benefit from a better description of empirical evidence. MEETHODS: During the 2022 mpox epidemic in the UK, we asked individuals about their partner counts in the preceding three weeks, which is about the same as usual infectious period for persons with active mpox. We used negative binomial regression (all responses) and Weibull regression (non-zero responses) to analyse the relationship between age and partner counts, adjusted for other demographic data (such as education level and occupation), sub-dividing by three types of respondent: men who have sex with men (MSM), men who have sex with women, and women who have sex with men. RESULTS: Most respondents had zero or one recent partner, all distributions were skewed. There was a relatively linear declining relationship between age and partner counts for heterosexual partnership groups, but a peak in partner counts and concurrency for MSMs in middle age years (age 35–54), especially for MSM who seemed to be in a highly sexually active subgroup. CONCLUSION: Useful data were collected that can be used to describe sex partner counts during the British mpox epidemic and that show distinctive partner count relationships with age, dependent on partnership type

Construct-level predictive validity of educational attainment and intellectual aptitude tests in medical student selection: meta-regression of six UK longitudinal studies

Background: Measures used for medical student selection should predict future performance during training. A problem for any selection study is that predictor-outcome correlations are known only in those who have been selected, whereas selectors need to know how measures would predict in the entire pool of applicants. That problem of interpretation can be solved by calculating construct-level predictive validity, an estimate of true predictor-outcome correlation across the range of applicant abilities. Methods: Construct-level predictive validities were calculated in six cohort studies of medical student selection and training (student entry, 1972 to 2009) for a range of predictors, including A-levels, General Certificates of Secondary Education (GCSEs)/O-levels, and aptitude tests (AH5 and UK Clinical Aptitude Test (UKCAT)). Outcomes included undergraduate basic medical science and finals assessments, as well as postgraduate measures of Membership of the Royal Colleges of Physicians of the United Kingdom (MRCP(UK)) performance and entry in the Specialist Register. Construct-level predictive validity was calculated with the method of Hunter, Schmidt and Le (2006), adapted to correct for right-censorship of examination results due to grade inflation. Results: Meta-regression analyzed 57 separate predictor-outcome correlations (POCs) and construct-level predictive validities (CLPVs). Mean CLPVs are substantially higher (.450) than mean POCs (.171). Mean CLPVs for first-year examinations, were high for A-levels (.809; CI: .501 to .935), and lower for GCSEs/O-levels (.332; CI: .024 to .583) and UKCAT (mean = .245; CI: .207 to .276). A-levels had higher CLPVs for all undergraduate and postgraduate assessments than did GCSEs/O-levels and intellectual aptitude tests. CLPVs of educational attainment measures decline somewhat during training, but continue to predict postgraduate performance. Intellectual aptitude tests have lower CLPVs than A-levels or GCSEs/O-levels. Conclusions: Educational attainment has strong CLPVs for undergraduate and postgraduate performance, accounting for perhaps 65% of true variance in first year performance. Such CLPVs justify the use of educational attainment measure in selection, but also raise a key theoretical question concerning the remaining 35% of variance (and measurement error, range restriction and right-censorship have been taken into account). Just as in astrophysics, ‘dark matter’ and ‘dark energy’ are posited to balance various theoretical equations, so medical student selection must also have its ‘dark variance’, whose nature is not yet properly characterized, but explains a third of the variation in performance during training. Some variance probably relates to factors which are unpredictable at selection, such as illness or other life events, but some is probably also associated with factors such as personality, motivation or study skills

The role of accelerator programmes in supporting the adoption of digital health technologies: A qualitative study of the perspectives of small- and medium-sized enterprises

Objective Evidence-based digital health technologies are increasingly important in delivering care to an ageing population with constrained resources. In the United Kingdom, accelerator programmes (APs) have been developed to support the adoption of digital health technologies within the National Health Service. This study aims to explore the perspectives of stakeholders using APs. Methods Stakeholders representing nine small -and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) that were engaged with three different APs ( n = 9). Semi-structured interviews were conducted with key informants between April and September 2018. Framework analysis of the data was performed to explore their perspectives on APs. Results Four key themes were generated. Informants reported the need to generate evidence before and during the programme, appreciating different types of evidence and their importance. Informants identified several key factors that were a catalyst for success, including involvement in the programme and access to individuals and organisations that were crucial for support. However, several barriers were identified at the programme and system levels. Finally, informants identified key supporting processes that enhanced the adoption of their innovations. Conclusion SMEs that develop digital health technologies report that, while APs are useful in supporting the adoption of these technologies, some issues remain. These relate to the emphasis on traditional research evidence that remains a challenge for SMEs to generate. Also, several system-level barriers to innovation in healthcare persist. As APs and SMEs continue to create an entrepreneurial ecosystem, there is increased potential for the development of supporting processes and infrastructure to accelerate the efficient and timely adoption of new digital health technologies

How Do Clinical Information Systems Affect the Cognitive Demands of General Practitioners?: Usability Study with a Focus on Cognitive Workload

oai:ojs.hijournal.bcs.org:article/85Background Clinical information systems in the National Health Service do not need to conform to any explicit usability requirements. Poor usability can increase the mental workload experienced by clinicians and cause fatigue, increase error rates and impact the overall patient safety. Mental workload can be used as a measure of usability.Objective To assess the subjective cognitive workload experienced by general practitioners (GPs) with their systems. To raise awareness of the importance of usability in system design among users, designers, developers and policymakers.Methods We used a modified version of the NASA Task Load Index, adapted for web. We developed a set of common clinical scenarios and computer tasks on an online survey. We emailed the study link to 199 clinical commissioning groups and 1,646 GP practices in England. Results Sixty-seven responders completed the survey. The respondents had spent an average of 17 years in general practice, had experience of using a mean of 1.5 GP computer systems and had used their current system for a mean time of 6.7 years. The mental workload score was not different among systems. There were significant differences among the task scores, but these differences were not specific to particular systems. The overall score and task scores were related to the length of experience with their present system. Conclusion Four tasks imposed a higher mental workload on GPs: ‘repeat prescribing’, ‘find episode’, ‘drug management’ and ‘overview records’. Further usability studies on GP systems should focus on these tasks. Users, policymakers, designers and developers should remain aware of the importance of usability in system design.What does this study add?• Current GP systems in England do not need to conform to explicit usability requirements. Poor usability can increase the mental workload of clinicians and lead to errors.• Some clinical computer tasks incur more cognitive workload than others and should be considered carefully during the design of a system.• GPs did not report overall very high levels of subjective cognitive workload when undertaking common clinical tasks with their systems.• Further usability studies on GP systems should focus on the tasks incurring higher cognitive workload.• Users, policymakers, and designers and developers should remain aware of the importance of usability in system design.

Rates of, and factors associated with, common mental disorders in homeworking UK Government response employees’ during COVID-19: a cross-sectional survey and secondary data analysis

INTRODUCTION: Working on the frontline during the COVID-19 pandemic has been associated with increased risk to mental health and wellbeing in multiple occupations and contexts. The current study aimed to provide an insight into the rate of probable mental health problems amongst United Kingdom (UK) Government employees who contributed to the COVID-19 response whilst working from home, and to ascertain what factors and constructs, if any, influence mental health and wellbeing in the sample population. METHODS: This paper reports on the findings from two studies completed by UK Government employees. Study 1: A cross-sectional online survey, containing standardised and validated measures of common mental health disorders of staff who actively contributed to the COVID-19 response from their own homes. Binary logistic regression was used to assess factors associated with mental health outcomes. Study 2: A secondary data analysis of cross-sectional survey data collected across three timepoints (May, June, and August) in 2020 focusing on the wellbeing of employees who worked from home during the COVID-19 pandemic. RESULTS: Study 1: 17.9% of participants met the threshold criteria for a probable moderate anxiety disorder, moderate depression, or post-traumatic stress disorder. Younger, less resilient, less productive individuals, with lower personal wellbeing and less enjoyment of working from home, were more likely to present with poorer mental health. Study 2: Found lower wellbeing was consistently associated with having less opportunities to look after one’s physical and mental health, and having unsupportive line managers and colleagues. CONCLUSIONS: It is important to ensure UK Government employees’ psychological needs are met whilst working from home and responding to enhanced incidents. It is recommended that workplaces should be seeking to continually build and improve employee resilience (e.g., through opportunities to increase social ties and support networks), essentially ensuring employees have necessary resources and skills to support themselves and others

Worry and behaviour at the start of the COVID-19 outbreak: results from three UK surveys (the COVID-19 Rapid Survey of Adherence to Interventions and Responses [CORSAIR] study)

We aimed to describe worry and uptake of behaviours that prevent the spread of infection (respiratory and hand hygiene, distancing) in the UK at the start of the COVID-19 outbreak (January and February 2020) and to investigate factors associated with worry and adopting protective behaviours. Three cross-sectional online surveys of UK adults (28 to 30 January, n=2016; 3 to 6 February, n=2002; 10 to 13 February 2020, n=2006) were conducted. We used logistic regressions to investigate associations between outcome measures (worry, respiratory and hand hygiene behaviour, distancing behaviour) and explanatory variables. 19.8% of participants (95% CI 18.8% to 20.8%) were very or extremely worried about COVID-19. People from minoritized ethnic groups were particularly likely to feel worried. 39.9% of participants (95% CI 37.7% to 42.0%) had completed one or more hand or respiratory hygiene behaviours more than usual in the last seven days. Uptake was associated with greater worry, perceived effectiveness of individual behaviours, self-efficacy for engaging in them, and having received more information. 13.7% (95% CI 12.2% to 15.2%) had reduced the number of people they had met. This was associated with greater worry, perceived effectiveness, and self-efficacy. At the start of novel infectious disease outbreaks, communications should emphasise perceived effectiveness of behaviours and ease with which they can be carried out

Worry and behaviour at the start of the COVID-19 outbreak: results from three UK surveys (the COVID-19 Rapid Survey of Adherence to Interventions and Responses [CORSAIR] study)

We aimed to describe worry and uptake of behaviours that prevent the spread of infection (respiratory and hand hygiene, distancing) in the UK at the start of the COVID-19 outbreak (January and February 2020) and to investigate factors associated with worry and adopting protective behaviours. Three cross-sectional online surveys of UK adults (28 to 30 January, n=2016; 3 to 6 February, n=2002; 10 to 13 February 2020, n=2006) were conducted. We used logistic regressions to investigate associations between outcome measures (worry, respiratory and hand hygiene behaviour, distancing behaviour) and explanatory variables. 19.8% of participants (95% CI 18.8% to 20.8%) were very or extremely worried about COVID-19. People from minoritized ethnic groups were particularly likely to feel worried. 39.9% of participants (95% CI 37.7% to 42.0%) had completed one or more hand or respiratory hygiene behaviours more than usual in the last seven days. Uptake was associated with greater worry, perceived effectiveness of individual behaviours, self-efficacy for engaging in them, and having received more information. 13.7% (95% CI 12.2% to 15.2%) had reduced the number of people they had met. This was associated with greater worry, perceived effectiveness, and self-efficacy. At the start of novel infectious disease outbreaks, communications should emphasise perceived effectiveness of behaviours and ease with which they can be carried out