Faculty Bibliography

BACKGROUND:Pinterest is a visually oriented social media platform with over 250 million monthly users. Previous studies have found misinformative content on genitourinary malignancies to be broadly disseminated on YouTube; however, no study has assessed the quality of this content on Pinterest. OBJECTIVE:Our objective was to evaluate the quality, understandability, and actionability of genitourinary malignancy content on Pinterest. METHODS:We examined 540 Pinterest posts or pins, using the following search terms: "bladder cancer," "kidney cancer," "prostate cancer," and "testicular cancer." The pins were limited to English language and topic-specific content, resulting in the following exclusions: bladder (n=88), kidney (n=4), prostate (n=79), and testicular cancer (n=10), leaving 359 pins as the final analytic sample. Pinterest pins were classified based on publisher and perceived race or ethnicity. Content was assessed using 2 validated grading systems: DISCERN quality criteria and the Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool. The presence of misinformation was evaluated using a published Likert scale ranging from 1=none to 5=high. RESULTS:Overall, 359 pins with a total of 8507 repins were evaluated. The primary publisher of genitourinary malignancy pins were health and wellness groups (n=162, 45%). Across all genitourinary malignancy pins with people, only 3% (n=7) were perceived as Black. Additionally, Asian (n=2, 1%) and Latinx (n=1, 0.5%) individuals were underrepresented in all pins. Nearly 75% (n=298) of the pins had moderate- to poor-quality information. Misinformative content was apparent in 4%-26% of all genitourinary cancer pins. Understandability and actionability were poor in 55% (n=198) and 100% (n=359) of the pins, respectively. CONCLUSIONS:On Pinterest, the majority of the urological oncology patient-centric content is of low quality and lacks diversity. This widely used, yet unregulated platform has the ability to influence consumers' health knowledge and decision-making. Ultimately, this can lead to consumers making suboptimal medical decisions. Moreover, our findings demonstrate underrepresentation across many racial and ethnic groups. Efforts should be made to ensure the dissemination of diverse, high-quality, and accurate health care information to the millions of users on Pinterest and other social media platforms.

It is without question that the Internet has democratized access to medical information, with estimates that 70% of the American population use it as a resource, particularly for cancer-related information. Such unfettered access to information has led to an increase in health misinformation. Fortunately, the data indicate that health care professionals remain among the most trusted information resources. Therefore, understanding how the Internet has changed engagement with health information and facilitated the spread of misinformation is an important task and challenge for cancer clinicians. In this review, we perform a meta-synthesis of qualitative data and point toward empirical evidence that characterizes misinformation in medicine, specifically in oncology. We present this as a call to action for all clinicians to become more active in ongoing efforts to combat misinformation in oncology.

The use of social media continues to increase in health care and academia. Health care practice, particularly the oncologic field, is constantly changing because of new knowledge, evidence-based research, clinical trials, and government policies. Therefore, oncology trainees and professionals continue to strive to stay up-to-date with practice guidelines, research, and skills. Although social media as an educational and professional development tool is no longer completely new to medicine and has been embraced, it is still under-researched in terms of various outcomes. Social media plays several key roles in professional development and academic advancement. We reviewed the literature to evaluate how social media can be used for professional development and academic promotion of oncology professionals.

INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND:The dramatic reduction of clinical and research activities within medical and surgical departments during COVID-19, coupled with the inability of medical students to engage in research, away rotations and academic meetings, have all posed important implications on residency match. METHODS:Using Twitter application programming interface available data, 83,000 program-specific and 28,500 candidate-specific tweets were extracted for the analysis. Applicants to urology residency were identified as matched vs unmatched based on 3-level identification and verification. All elements of microblogging were captured through Anaconda Navigator. The primary endpoint was residency match, assessed as correlation to Twitter analytics (ie retweets, tweets). The final list of matched/unmatched applicants through this process was cross-referenced with internal validation of information obtained from the American Urological Association. RESULTS:A total of 28,500 English language posts from 250 matched and 45 unmatched applicants were included in the analysis. Matched applicants generally showed higher number of followers (median 171 [IQR 88-317.5] vs 83 [42-192], p=0.001), tweet likes (2.57 [1.53-4.52] vs 1.5 [0.35-3.03], p=0.048), and recent and total manuscripts (1 [0-2] vs 0 [0-1], p=0.006); 1 [0-3] vs 0 [0-1], p=0.016) in comparison to the unmatched cohort. On multivariable analysis, after adjusting for location, total number of citations and manuscripts, being a female (OR 4.95), having more followers (OR 1.01), individual tweet likes (OR 1.011) and total number of tweets (OR 1.02) increased overall odds of matching into a urology residency. CONCLUSIONS:Our study of the 2021 urology residency application cycle and use of Twitter highlighted distinct differences among matched and unmatched applicants and their respective Twitter analytics, highlighting a potential professional development opportunity offered by social media in underscoring applicants' profiles.

BACKGROUND:Germline testing has an increasingly important role in prostate cancer care. However, a relative shortage of genetic counselors necessitates alternate strategies for delivery of pre-test education for germline testing. This study, funded by the Prostate Cancer Foundation, seeks to address the need for novel methods of delivery of pre-test germline education beyond traditional germline counseling to facilitate informed patient decision-making for germline testing. METHODS:This is a two-armed randomized controlled trial (RCT) with a target enrollment of 173 participants with prostate cancer per study arm (total anticipated n = 346). Patients who meet criteria for germline testing based on tumor features, family history or Ashkenazi Jewish ancestry are being recruited from 5 US sites including academic, private practice and Veterans healthcare settings. Consenting participants are randomized to the interactive pretest webtool or germline counseling with assessment of key patient-reported outcomes involved in informed decision-making for germline testing. RESULTS:Participants complete surveys at baseline, after pretest education/counseling, and following disclosure of germline results. The primary outcome of the study is decisional conflict for germline testing. Secondary outcomes include genetic knowledge, satisfaction, uptake of germline testing, and understanding of results. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Our hypothesis is that the web-based genetic education tool is non-inferior to traditional genetic counseling regarding key patient-reported outcomes involved in informed decision-making for germline testing. If proven, the results would support deploying the webtool across various practice settings to facilitate pre-test genetic education for individuals with prostate cancer and developing collaborative care strategies with genetic counseling. CLINICALTRIALS/RESULTS:gov Identifier: NCT04447703.

OBJECTIVES/OBJECTIVE:To perform a survey assessing the use of, attitudes towards, and perceived utility of social media (SoMe) in the 2021 urology residency match. METHODS:We distributed surveys to urology residency applicants and program directors (PDs) via the Urology Match 2021 Google Spreadsheet and email. The survey collected demographic information as well as SoMe activity, perceived pressure to use SoMe, match results, and attitudes regarding the utility of SoMe in the match process. RESULTS:A total of 108/528 (20%) applicants registered for the 2021 match and 61/142 (43%) PDs completed the survey. More applicants than PDs felt that SoMe helped them gain better insight into residency programs or applicants, respectively. Fewer applicants than PDs felt that SoMe activity provided a benefit to them in the match process. No significant relationship was found between SoMe viewing frequency, posting frequency, or tweetorial use with match outcomes. The majority of PDs believed that SoMe played a more important role in the 2021 match process than previous years while 15% and 12% reported that an applicant's SoMe activity helped or hurt the chances of matching to their program respectively. CONCLUSIONS:SoMe, particularly Twitter, was widely used in the 2021 match by both applicants and PDs. A majority of applicants and PDs believed that SoMe use aided them in some way in the match process, yet there was no relationship between the volume or type of applicant SoMe activity and match outcomes.