A Peer-Led Social Media Intervention to Improve Interest in Research Careers Among Urban Youth: Mixed Methods Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Novel methods to boost interest in scientific research careers among minority youth are largely unexplored. Social media offers a unique avenue toward influencing teen behavior and attitudes, and can therefore be utilized to stimulate interest in clinical research. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to engage high-achieving minority youth enrolled in a science pipeline program to develop a targeted social media marketing campaign for boosting interest in clinical research careers among their peers. METHODS: Students enrolled in the Training Early Achievers for Careers in Health program conducted focus groups in their communities to inform themes that best promote clinical research. They then scripted, storyboarded, and filmed a short video to share on social media with a campaign hashtag. Additionally, each student enrolled peers from their social circle to be subjects of the study. Subjects were sent a Career Orientation Survey at baseline to assess preliminary interest in clinical research careers and again after the campaign to assess how they saw the video, their perceptions of the video, and interest in clinical research careers after watching the video. Subjects who did not see the video through the online campaign were invited to watch the video via a link on the postsurvey. Interest change scores were calculated using differences in Likert-scale responses to the question "how interested are you in a career in clinical research?" An ordinal logistic regression model was used to test the association between watching a peer-shared video, perception of entertainment, and interest change score controlling for underrepresented minorities in medicine status (Black, American Indian/Alaska Native, Native Hawaiian, or Pacific Islander), gender, and baseline interest in medical or clinical research careers. RESULTS: From 2014 to 2017, 325 subjects were enrolled as part of 4 distinct campaigns: #WhereScienceMeetsReality, #RedefiningResearch, #DoYourResearch, and #LifeWithoutResearch. Over half (n=180) of the subjects watched the video via the campaign, 227/295 (76.9%) found the video entertaining, and 92/325 (28.3%) demonstrated baseline interest in clinical research. The ordinal logistic regression model showed that subjects who viewed the video from a peer (odds ratio [OR] 1.56, 95% CI 1.00-2.44, P=.05) or found the video entertaining (OR 1.36, 95% CI 1.01-1.82, P=.04) had greater odds of increasing interest in a clinical research career. Subjects with a higher baseline interest in medicine (OR 1.55, 95% CI 1.28-1.87, P<.001) also had greater odds of increasing their interest in clinical research. CONCLUSIONS: The spread of authentic and relevant peer-created messages via social media can increase interest in clinical research careers among diverse teens. Peer-driven social media campaigns should be explored as a way to effectively recruit minority youth into scientific research careers.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.014 | 0.147 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".