Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

PRESENTATION: Social Media for Public Health

665 views

Published on

  • Be the first to comment

PRESENTATION: Social Media for Public Health

  1. 1. Social Media for Public Health Lorelei Woody, MLIS University of Michigan Taubman Health Sciences Library (loreleih@umich.edu)http://smforph.ning.com
  2. 2. Profile RSS Tweeting Live Feed Digg It! Following Status UpdateMashable Slideshare #hashtag Friending Avatar Delicious Feed Burner Hootsuite Linked In Newb
  3. 3. http://smforph.ning.com
  4. 4. Take-Aways: • Social Media for Public Health Project – Content, uses, & potential for your organization • Social Media – Ways to use social media in a public health context • Taking the next step – Considerations for moving forwardhttp://smforph.ning.com
  5. 5. If these are “social” tools, why try to find a role here anyway?A)Because it’s cool?B)Because we’ve got administrativepressure to get involved?C)Because this is where our public is?D)To fill a need in our population?E)To help solve organizational issues?
  6. 6. Why do we care?A)Because it’s cool?B)Because we’ve got administrativepressure to get involved?C)Because this is where our public is?D)To fill a need in our population?E)To help solve organizational issues?
  7. 7. 47% of all online adults use social networking sites http://www.pewinternet.org/Reports/2010/Social-Media-and-Young-Adults.aspx?r=1
  8. 8. 72% of online 18-29 year olds use social networking sites http://www.pewinternet.org/Reports/2010/Social-Media-and-Young-Adults.aspx?r=1
  9. 9. 73% of online teens use social networking sites http://www.pewinternet.org/Reports/2010/Social-Media-and-Young-Adults.aspx?r=1
  10. 10. 11% of internet users ages thirty and older maintain a personal blog http://www.pewinternet.org/Reports/2010/Social-Media-and-Young-Adults.aspx?r=1
  11. 11. So What?Why for Public Health?
  12. 12. 80% of internet users have looked online for health information http://www.pewinternet.org/Reports/2009/8-The-Social-Life-of-Health-Information.aspx
  13. 13. 41% of e-patients have read someone elses commentary or experience about health or medical issues on an online news group, website, or blog http://www.pewinternet.org/Reports/2009/8-The-Social-Life-of-Health-Information.aspx
  14. 14. 19% of e-patients have signed up to receive updates about health or medical issues http://www.pewinternet.org/Reports/2009/8-The-Social-Life-of-Health-Information.aspx
  15. 15. http://smforph.ning.com
  16. 16. Social Media for Public Health: Project background • Based on “Learning 2.0” program developed at the Public Library of Charlotte & Mecklenburg County (23 Things) • Hosted on a Ning social networking site – users sign up, create a profile, and can interact with each otherhttp://smforph.ning.com
  17. 17. Social Media for Public Health: online training & community • Set of 10 modules: – Videos, “plain language” descriptions, and step- by-step activities to practice with different social media technologies • Self-directed; self-paced • May be implemented within an organizationhttp://smforph.ning.com
  18. 18. http://smforph.ning.com
  19. 19. Social Media for Public Health: pilot test -- Saginaw • 49 participants – 11% between 18-29yrs – 25% between 30-39yrs – 23% between 40-49yrs – 34% between 50-59yrs – 7% = 60+yrs • Of the 49 participants: – 7 created a profile and had no further involvement (14%); – 20 created a profile and posted at least one photo or social comment (41%); – 22 appeared to actively work through some or all of the social media training modules (45%).http://smforph.ning.com
  20. 20. Social Media for Public Health: pilot test -- Saginaw Pretest: Most Comfortable Posttest: Most Comfortable 1. Text Messaging [69%] 1. Text messaging [79%] 2. Facebook or social 2. Facebook or other social networking site [48%] networking site [79%] 3. Google Docs [32%] 3. Blogs [71%] 4. Flickr or other photo 4. Twitter [67%] sharing site [29%] 5. YouTube or other video 5. SlideShare or other sharing site [54%] slide sharing site [27%]http://smforph.ning.com
  21. 21. Social Media for Public Health: pilot test -- Saginaw Pretest: Least Comfortable Posttest: Least Comfortable 1. Twitter [87%] 1. Wikis [78%] 2. Wikis [86%] 2. SlideShare or other slide 3. Blogs [78%] sharing site (tie 2 & 3) [54%] 4. YouTube or other video 3. Flick or other photo sharing sharing site [76%] site (tie 2 & 3) [54%] 5. Online data visualization 4. Online data visualization tools tools [73%] [50%] 5. YouTube or other video sharing site [46%]http://smforph.ning.com
  22. 22. Social Media for Public Health: pilot test -- Saginaw Pretest: Most Useful Posttest: Most Useful 1. Online data visualization 1. Text messaging tools 2. Google Docs (tie 2 & 3) 2. Facebook or other social networking site 3. YouTube or other video 3. Google Docs sharing site (tie 2 & 3) 4. Text messaging (tie 4 & 5) 4. Facebook or other social 5. SlideShare or other slide networking site (tie 4 & 5) sharing site (tie 4 & 5) 5. Online data visualization tools (tie 4 & 5)http://smforph.ning.com
  23. 23. Social Media for Public Health: pilot test -- Saginaw Pretest: Preferred Training Posttest: Preferred Training 1. Attend a class with 1. Complete an online hands on learning tutorial 2. Attend a live 2. Attend a class with demonstration hands on learning 3. Just try it and 3. Complete an online figure it out on your tutorial ownhttp://smforph.ning.com
  24. 24. Social Media for Public Health: pilot test -- Saginaw • I found participating in this experience quite beneficial and educational. I also believe that the staff of SCDPH enjoyed the sense of "community" found by sharing comments, photos, etcetera. • Used responsibly, I think social media can be a useful tool to reach many people and share important information.http://smforph.ning.com
  25. 25. Social Media for Public Health: pilot test -- Saginaw • This pilot project has been extremely helpful to SCDPH in getting our staff to think about how social media technologies can be applied in our daily work. It was also very helpful in identifying potential staff that can be pulled in for use/development of such technologies. […] Without this pilot project we would continue to spin our wheels on how to get started with some of these technologies, and frankly just have people throw up road blocks for its use. This has helped build organizational buy-in from all levels of staff to the importance and usefulness of social media.http://smforph.ning.com
  26. 26. http://smforph.ning.com
  27. 27. BlogsFacebookTwitterYouTube
  28. 28. What does success look like?http://smforph.ning.com
  29. 29. Levels of Engagement • Listen to and monitor social chatter • Brand your organization across social media platforms • Broadcast your message across social media • Promote your social media profile and social bookmarking • Engage your audience through social mediahttp://smforph.ning.com
  30. 30. Planning for Social Media • Success requires… • Training! – Clear expectations – Time to “play” – Shared goals – Break down barriers – Administrative support – Enables more helpers – Technical capacity – Generates new ideas – Committed staff – Time & support – Intentional Planning!http://smforph.ning.com
  31. 31. Planning for Social Media • Be Strategic! (You probably can’t do it all) • Brainstorm: – Concentrate on challenges/issues (NOT technologies) – Brainstorm possible applications or solutions • Rank in order of priority • Rank in order of ease/difficulty – Low hanging fruit: • high priority, easy to do – go for it!http://smforph.ning.com
  32. 32. What does success look like?http://smforph.ning.com
  33. 33. Mindset “Engaging in social media requires a shift in the way associations view themselves and their relationships with members. The shift is happening on a cultural, organizational, and individual level” - SocialFish white paper: Social Media, Risk, and Policies for Associations (2010)http://smforph.ning.com
  34. 34. See smforph.ning.com for examples!http://smforph.ning.com
  35. 35. http://smforph.ning.com
  36. 36. Contact • Lorelei Woody loreleih@umich.edu (734) 615-8923 • Program also developed by Whitney Townsend, Gillian Mayman; supported by Abby Bedford, Bethany Harris; with direction from Nancy Allee, Jane Blumenthal. • Supported by the National Network of Libraries of Medicine Greater Midwest Region, subcontract.http://smforph.ning.com
  37. 37. References • Blowers, Helene. “Learning 2.0.” The Public Library of Charlotte & Mecklenburg County. October 2006. http://plcmcl2-about.blogspot.com/ • Fox, Susannah. “Social Media’s Promise for Public Health.” E-Patients.net. August 2009. http://e-patients.net/archives/2009/08/social-medias-promise-for-public-hea • Fox, Susannah. “The Social Life of Health Information.” Pew Internet & American Life Project: California Healthcare Foundation. June 2009. http://www.pewinternet.org/~/media//Files/Reports/2009/PIP_Health_20 09.pdf • InQbation. “Government/Nonprofit Policy: Use of Social Media.” Washington, DC. February 2008. http://www.inqbation.com/government- policy-on-the-use-of-social-mediahttp://smforph.ning.com
  38. 38. References • Merrill, Molly. “Eight steps for creating your social media policy.” Healthcare IT News: New Gloucester, ME. April 2010. http://www.healthcareitnews.com/news/eight-steps-creating-your-social- media-policy • Northwest Center for Public Health Practice. “Use of Social Media Tools: Public Health Examples” (recorded webinar + documents). Seattle, WA. August 2010. http://www.nwcphp.org/training/hot-topics/2010-hot- topics/social-media-examples • Social Media for Public Health. http://smforph.ning.com • Social Media Governance. “Policy Database.” http://socialmediagovernance.com/policies.php • White, Leslie. “Social Media, Risk, and Policies for Associations.” Social Fish: Washington, DC. January 2010. http://www.socialfish.org/whitepaper#policieshttp://smforph.ning.com

×