Exploring social media and admissions decision-making - friends or foes?

Marcus Law, Maria Mylopoulos, Paula Veinot, Daniel Miller, Mark D Hanson

Abstract read

In one paragraph

Article in Canadian medical education journal, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it

0cells of the map it votes in

0citing papers in PubMed

–field-weighted citation impact

1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Marcus LawDepartment of Family and Community Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto.

Maria MylopoulosDepartment of Pediatrics, Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto; The Wilson Centre, Toronto, ON.

Paula VeinotDepartment of Family and Community Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto.

Daniel MillerDepartment of Family and Community Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto.

Mark D HansonIndependent Research Consultant, Toronto, ON.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDespite the ever-increasing use of social media (e.g., Facebook, Twitter) little is known about its use in medical school admissions. This qualitative study explores whether and how social media (SM) is used in undergraduate admissions in Canada, and the attitudes of admissions personnel towards such use.

methodsPhone interviews were conducted with admissions deans and nominated admissions personnel. A qualitative descriptive analysis was performed using iterative coding and comparing, and grouping data into themes.

resultsPersonnel from 15 of 17 Canadian medical schools participated. A sizeable proportion had, at some point, examined social media (SM) profiles to acquire information on applicants. Participants did not report using it explicitly to screen all applicants (primary use); however, several did admit to looking at SM to follow up on preliminary indications of misbehaviour (secondary use). Participants articulated concerns, such as validity and equity, about using SM in admissions. Despite no schools having existing policy, participants expressed openness to future use.

conclusionsWhile some of the 15 schools had used SM to acquire information on applicants, criteria for formulating judgments were obscure, and participants expressed significant apprehension, based on concerns for fairness and validity. Findings suggest participant ambivalence and ongoing risks associated with "hidden" selection practices.

Identifiers

PMID28344689

PMCPMC5344047

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata

LicenceCC BY

Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.