Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
Slide deck for 2012 University of Oklahoma Department of Communication Sooner Conference: "Putting Wikis to Work: A pilot case study of CMC in academic health care research communities of practice"
Citation preview
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
