838 infection control & hospital epidemiology july 2017, vol. 38, no. 7


information presented in posts, but in practice, the option to comment is rarely used by readers (ie, only 32% of blogs had ≥1 comment post). Most high-level blogs included in the present study were maintained by a multidisciplinary team comprising HCPs and academics, which allows the cross-checking of post quality. During the selection process, 141 of 295 blogs (48%) did not publish posts during the 6months prior to the data collection for this study. This raises the question of reliability of outdated information delivered by some blogs. The quality assessment tool developed for the present


study included quantitative and qualitative criteria, and it provided a frame with which to measure the value and accuracy of the message delivered. The published checklist used as a comparison to this tool focuses on the credibility, the content, and the design of blogs.13 This checklist provides an overall estimation of blogs and evaluates their value as educational support rather than as platform for sharing information and ideas. Regarding the format of a blog, pictures and video are


becoming more widespread; they complement the text and help readers understand the message. Blogs with high quality scores also tended to invite expert guest bloggers or inter- viewees. This feature gives credibility to the message delivered and to the blog in general. Globally, the best blogs stand out by clearly stating their purpose, by being easy to read and well presented, and by providing a high level of analysis. The field of antimicrobial stewardship and infection control


are poorly represented in the blogosphere. With knowledge and recommendations on the efficient and accurate use of antibiotics in constant change, the creation of a blog giving clear information and understandable advice to clinicians on antimicrobial stewardship could be a valuable resource. Previous studies assessing blogs focused on other healthcare disciplines and highlighted the concern of the medical world about blogs as a medium of communication.22,23 To our knowledge, we are the first to provide a detailed analysis regarding


identified a large proportion of the most influential blogs in infectious diseases, microbiology, and infection control using snowball sampling, some blogs may have not been captured by this approach. Second, the qualitative criteria were scored by 3 different people and reflect their own perception; thus, scoring may be subjective. However, the use of a Likert scale has been shown to reduce this bias.24 Finally, this study


and assessment of blogs, bloggers, and their audiences in the fields of infectious diseases, infection prevention and control, medical microbiology, and antimicrobial stewardship. The assessment tool we developed could be used to assess blogs in other fields of health science.13 The PRISMA method allowed selection and analysis similar to a systematic review, reducing subjectivity. The list of blogs identified in this study can guide interested readers to the most helpful professional blogs. The qualitative view of bloggers and readers is essential to understanding how blogs may be used and how they should be structured. This study has several limitations. First, although we


critique important findings, and highlight implications for frontline staff or researchers. While academic journals remain the standard for disseminating scientific knowledge, blogs represent user-friendly, interactive, and efficient tools for the development of online research communities, and they are a powerful means of sharing time-sensitive information, analysis, and opinion on emerging issues. Crucial topics such as antimicrobial stewardship remain poorly represented in the blogosphere.


focused only on blogs developed for HCPs or researchers. Blogs aimed at patients and the public will become increasingly important as health care shifts toward a more patient-centered approach. Blogs mainly aggregate relevant articles, publicize and


acknowledgments


Financial support: This research was partially funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Protection Research Unit in Healthcare Associated Infection and Antimicrobial Resistance at Imperial College London, in partnership with Public Health England (PHE), and the NIHR Imperial Patient Safety Translational Research Centre. The views expressed are those of the author (s) and not necessarily those of the NationalHealth Service (NHS), the NIHR, the Department of Health, or PHE. The authors also acknowledge the UK Clinical Research Collaboration Centre for Infection Prevention and Management, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, and the NIHR Imperial Biomedical Research Centre. Potential conflicts of interest: All authors report no conflicts of interest relevant


to this article. Address correspondence to Dr Gabriel Birgand, Health Protection


Research Unit in Healthcare-Associated Infections and Antimicrobial Resistance, Imperial College London, Hammersmith Campus, Du Cane Road, London W12 0NN (g.birgand@imperial.ac.uk).


supplementary material


To view supplementary material for this article, please visit https://doi.org/10.1017/ice.2017.69


references 1. Borio L, Cox E, LurieN. combating emerging threats—accelerating the availability of medical therapies. NEnglJMed 2015;373: 993–995.


2. O’Neill J. Antimicrobial resistance: tackling a crisis for the health and wealth of nations. Review on Antimicrobial Resistance website. http://amr-review.org/. Published 2014. Accessed December 21, 2016.


3. Cormode G, Krishnamurthy B. Key differences between Web 1.0 and Web 2.0. First Monday website. http://firstmonday.org/ article/view/2125/1972. Published 2008. Accessed December 21, 2016.


4. Miller EA, Pole A. Diagnosis blog: checking up on health blogs in the blogosphere. Am J Public Health 2010;100:1514–1519.


5. Goff DA, Kullar R, Newland JG. Review of Twitter for infectious diseases clinicians: useful or a waste of time? Clin Infect Dis 2015;60:1533–1540.


6. Charles-Smith LE, Reynolds TL, Cameron MA, et al. Using social media for actionable disease surveillance and outbreakmanagement: a systematic literature review. PloS One 2015;10:e0139701.


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76  |  Page 77  |  Page 78  |  Page 79  |  Page 80  |  Page 81  |  Page 82  |  Page 83  |  Page 84  |  Page 85  |  Page 86  |  Page 87  |  Page 88  |  Page 89  |  Page 90  |  Page 91  |  Page 92  |  Page 93  |  Page 94  |  Page 95  |  Page 96  |  Page 97  |  Page 98  |  Page 99  |  Page 100  |  Page 101  |  Page 102  |  Page 103  |  Page 104  |  Page 105  |  Page 106  |  Page 107  |  Page 108  |  Page 109  |  Page 110  |  Page 111  |  Page 112  |  Page 113  |  Page 114  |  Page 115  |  Page 116  |  Page 117  |  Page 118  |  Page 119  |  Page 120  |  Page 121  |  Page 122  |  Page 123  |  Page 124  |  Page 125  |  Page 126  |  Page 127  |  Page 128  |  Page 129  |  Page 130  |  Page 131  |  Page 132  |  Page 133  |  Page 134  |  Page 135  |  Page 136