Putting Wikis to Work in an Online Research Environment

Michelle C. FaraboughSooner Conference 2012

Putting Wikis to Work: A pilot case study of CMC in academic health care research communities of practice

Framing the case study

• OU-Tulsa School of Community Medicine (Health) +

• Knowledge Management (Communication) =

• CDC 2010 National Conference onHealth Communication, Marketing, and Media

The problem• Health care research required for faculty and residents• Time and geographic constraints• Patient visits and emergencies take precedence• Email “culture”• Delayed and uncompleted studies• Vast amount of information and data

The objective• Select appropriate CMC tool• Identify benefits and barriers to use• Share lessons learned• Increase awareness of Web 2.0 CMC

Limitations• Just that… a case study • Continuous improvement research • Small n and large number of antecedents• Emerging technologies

Would new social media “work” for academic health care research CoPs?• Would it be used?• Would it be perceived as more efficient

than email for collaborative communication and project management?

Select appropriate CMC tool

Selection Criteria

What is a wiki?

Research Design• Communities of Practice• Chronic Pain

• Clinical and research faculty physicians, residents, and staff fromOU, TU, and Laureate Institute for Brain Research

• No funding or deadline• Aging in Place

• Clinical and research faculty, staff, and Tulsa community health service leaders engaged in CBPR

• Seed grant funding and one year deadline• Resident Patient Care Projects

• Clinical and research faculty physicians, residents, and staff

• Residency requirement and deadline

Demographics

Identify benefits and barriers to use• Sources of information• Web analytics: access, edit or create content• Self-administered, anonymous survey: perception• Key informant open-ended questionnaire: perception

• Informal Analysis• Quantitative: web analytics and survey questions• Qualitative: questionnaire

User analytics

Access Content Create Content Edit Content0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

93.86

64.29

78.57

90

10

66.67

71.43

21.43

50

AIP (n=14)PCP (n=30)CP (n=14)

Rate

of U

sage

Access Create Edit

Perceived usefulness compared to email

Store Organize Find0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

77.8

66.7

62.5

69.2

61.5

46.2

33.3 33.3

50 AIP (N=9)PCP (N=19)CP (N=6)

%

Per

cent

of

Use

rs

Store Organize Find

Themes from key informants• University culture (cost, IT, PHI security, email)• Technical savvy• Training• Organization of information• Asynchronous communication

Key informant comments• “The greatest challenge is getting people who are

committed to use it. For those with no protected time for research or engagement on a particular research project, use of the wiki will be minimal at best.”

• “No matter how helpful, you have to have time to read, follow, and use it.”

• “I was hesitant at first, but now that I have used it I would recommend it.”

• “Great resource. I didn’t know things like this existed.”

Share lessons learned• Consider project needs and users • Deadlines and funding affect use• Email is greatest competition• Key individuals affect use and perceived usefulness• Increased awareness = first step toward culture change

Contact me…

Michelle@KMRM.com