Online Posting of Unprofessional Content by Medical Students
Online Posting of Unprofessional Content by Medical Students
复制标题
DOI：
10.1001/jama.2009.1387
复制
发表时间：
2009-09-23
影响因子：
120.7
通讯作者：
Kind, Terry
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Chretien, Katherine C.;Greysen, S. Ryan;Kind, Terry
Context Web 2.0 应用程序（例如社交网站）正在给医疗专业精神带来新的挑战。这一问题在本科医学教育中的范围尚未明确界定。目的评估美国医学院在学生在线发布不专业内容方面的经验以及现有医学院处理在线发布的政策。设计、设置和参与者向学生事务主任、其代表或美国医学院协会各机构的同行发送了一项匿名电子调查。数据收集于 2009 年 3 月和 4 月。 主要结果指标 报告学生在线发布不专业内容事件的学校百分比、专业违规类型、采取的纪律处分、现有机构政策以及政策制定计划。结果 60% 的美国医学院做出回应 (78/130)。在这些学校中，60% (47/78) 报告了学生在网上发布不专业内容的事件。 13% (6/46) 报告了侵犯患者隐私的行为。学生经常使用脏话（52%；22/42）、坦率的歧视性语言（48%；19/40）、醉酒描述（39%；17/44）和性暗示材料（38%；16/42）。在报告事件并回答纪律处分问题的 45 所学校中，30 所学校发出非正式警告（67%），3 所学校报告学生被开除（7%）。 38% (28/73) 的院长报告了涵盖学生在线发布内容的政策。在没有此类政策的学校中，11% (5/46) 正在积极制定新政策以涵盖在线内容。报告事件的院长更有可能报告有这样的政策（51% vs 18%；P = .006），相信这些问题可以得到有效解决（91% vs 63%；P = .003），并且有更高的关注度（P = .02）。结论 许多受访学校都发生过不专业的学生在线发帖事件，但他们可能没有制定适当的政策。贾马。 2009;302(12):1309-1315
Context Web 2.0 applications, such as social networking sites, are creating new challenges for medical professionalism. The scope of this problem in undergraduate medical education is not well-defined.Objective To assess the experience of US medical schools with online posting of unprofessional content by students and existing medical school policies to address online posting.Design, Setting, and Participants An anonymous electronic survey was sent to deans of student affairs, their representatives, or counterparts from each institution in the Association of American Medical Colleges. Data were collected in March and April 2009.Main Outcome Measures Percentage of schools reporting incidents of students posting unprofessional content online, type of professionalism infraction, disciplinary actions taken, existence of institution policies, and plans for policy development.Results Sixty percent of US medical schools responded (78/130). Of these schools, 60% (47/78) reported incidents of students posting unprofessional online content. Violations of patient confidentiality were reported by 13% (6/46). Student use of profanity (52%; 22/42), frankly discriminatory language (48%; 19/40), depiction of intoxication (39%; 17/44), and sexually suggestive material (38%; 16/42) were commonly reported. Of 45 schools that reported an incident and responded to the question about disciplinary actions, 30 gave informal warning (67%) and 3 reported student dismissal (7%). Policies that cover student-posted online content were reported by 38% (28/73) of deans. Of schools without such policies, 11% (5/46) were actively developing new policies to cover online content. Deans reporting incidents were significantly more likely to report having such a policy (51% vs 18%; P = .006), believing these issues could be effectively addressed (91% vs 63%; P = .003), and having higher levels of concern (P = .02).Conclusion Many responding schools had incidents of unprofessional student online postings, but they may not have adequate policy in place. JAMA. 2009;302(12):1309-1315