Subject(s)
Neoplasms , Sexual and Gender Minorities , Humans , Gender Identity , Neoplasms/radiotherapyABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Twitter journal clubs are a relatively new adaptation of an established continuing professional development (CPD) activity within healthcare. The medical radiation science (MRS) journal club 'MedRadJClub' (MRJC) was founded in March 2015 by a group of academics, researchers and clinicians as an international forum for the discussion of peer-reviewed papers. To investigate the reach and impact of MRJC, a five-year analysis was conducted. METHODS: Tweetchat data (number of participants, tweets and impressions) for the first five years of MRJC were extracted and chat topics organised into themes. Fifth anniversary MRJC chat tweets were analysed and examples of academic and professional outputs were collated. RESULTS: A total of 59 chats have been held over five years with a mean of 41 participants and 483,000 impressions per hour-long synchronous chat. Ten different tweetchat themes were identified, with student engagement/preceptorship the most popular. Eight posters or oral presentations at conferences, one social media workshop and four papers have been produced. Qualitative analysis revealed five core themes relating to the perceived benefits of participation in MRJC: (1) CPD and research impact, (2) professional growth and influencing practice, (3) interdisciplinary learning and inclusion, (4) networking and social support and (5) globalisation. CONCLUSION: MRJC is a unique, multi-professional, global community with consistent engagement. It is beneficial for both CPD, research engagement, dissemination and socialisation within the MRS community.
Subject(s)
Social Media , Delivery of Health Care , Humans , Internationality , OrganizationsABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: The medical radiation sciences' (MRS) MedRadJournalClub attracts a global group of participants to monthly sessions to discuss selected journal articles. The September 2017 session explored the experiences of MRS professionals working with lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) patients. The aim of the chat was to establish staff educational preparation, how participants' organizations approached the issue, and what participants would do differently at work or at home in relation to this patient population after the chat. METHOD: Data were extracted using the Twitter advanced search function with #MedRadJClub from the 19th to 23rd September 2017. The data were reviewed and categorized for themes. Tweets related to shared LGBT resources were captured, verified, and counted separately. RESULTS: 44 participants took part in the September Twitter chat. After data cleaning, 127 tweets were included for analysis with a further 16 tweets sharing LGBT resources. Almost all of the participants disclosed that they had no undergraduate education or workplace training in the care of LGBT patients. Workplaces of a limited few participants had specific approaches to improve experiences for this patient population. Many participants were eager to advocate for changes in their workplaces after the Twitter chat. CONCLUSION: There is still work to be carried out to educate MRS professionals to enhance their LGBT patients' experience and improve workplaces. Positive changes in education and a more inclusive clinical environment will ultimately improve care for LGBT patients.
