ArticleBMC public health2024
Strategies for crowdsourcing hearing health information: a comparative study of educational programs and volunteer-based campaigns on Wikimedia.
Article in BMC public health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Analysis of deafness gene screening results in 15771 newborn cases in Anyang city of Henan.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
20 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundSeveral health institutions developed strategies to improve health content on Wikimedia platforms given their unparalleled reach. The objective of this study was to compare an online volunteer-based Wikimedia outreach campaign with university course Wikipedia assignments (both focused on improving hearing health content in Wikimedia's public digital knowledge archives), in terms of the reach of the contributions and the extent of the participants' input. A secondary objective was to examine the feasibility and the implementation of the different strategies.
methodsThe research team partnered for the (1) coordination of improvements in hearing and healthcare content through educational programs using Wikimedia platforms, (2) participation in the global campaign Wiki4WorldHearingDay2023 and (3) evaluation of the proposed strategies. Metrics used in the comparison of the two strategies included the number of articles edited, number of views of the edited articles (as reach) and the extent of edits, captured as the number of words. The feasibility evaluation included assessing recruitment success and the implementation of the proposed plan among faculty, students from various university programs, and volunteers representing different constituencies.
resultsThe effort increased the availability of quality plain language information on hearing conditions and hearing care. Both strategies demonstrated to be feasible by their success in recruiting participants who contributed to the effort and by measurable outputs as edits. The contribution of content to Wikimedia platforms as part of education activities provided a more robust result. Wiki4WorldHearingDay2023 145 participants (78 from educational programs) contributed 167,000 words, 258 + references and 140 images to 322 Wikipedia articles (283 existing and 39 new ones), which were viewed 16.5 million times. Contributions occurred in six languages. Edits in Portuguese, mainly by those involved in educational programs, led the number of articles (226 or 70.2%) that were expanded or created during the 5-month tracking period.
conclusionsThe elements that contributed to the success of the studied strategies include an impact topic, coordination with educational programs, international multidisciplinary collaborations, the dissemination of the initiative in several platforms, connection with a robust local Wikimedia affiliate, and the use of a technical infrastructure that provides metrics and coordination mechanisms.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.