An extensive body of knowledge exists on a wide range of health outcomes; however, studies from public health settings suggest that evidence-based practices are not disseminated effectively (40–42). More specifically, we lack data demonstrating that available evidence from the scientific literature is coming to and influencing prevention programs and interventions or reaching the ultimate beneficiary (43). Wikipedia has been considered an important resource for healthcare information in different contexts, as it is able to reach the public, patients, students, and professionals looking for health-related information online (15, 44, 45).
NIOSH was one of the first US federal agencies to collaborate with the Wikimedia organizations, which developed into a multicomponent strategy.(21) One of these components involves partnering with education programs for the assignment of Wikipedia editing tasks to students. Another component involves organizing events of all sizes to expand and improve Wikipedia content in specific areas. NIOSH, in collaboration with the WHO and several other institutions, organized the global online events Wiki4WorldHearingDay2019 and Wiki4YearOfSound2020, and Wiki4WorldHearingDay2023 (focus of the present study) to improve the Wikipedia content related to acoustics, hearing, hearing health services, hearing testing, preventive and treatment interventions(30, 31). The participation of those enrolled in education activities had a large impact on the extent of contributions completed during the data collection period of this study.
The objectives of the present study were to examine the feasibility and factors that contributed to the implementation of two strategies for science communication using Wikimedia platforms. We compared the contribution to the global campaign from those enrolled in educational activities versus volunteer activities from Wikipedia editors. We reported the number of views of the edited articles, the extent of the edits (number of words added), and whether the contributions remained in Wikipedia (deemed acceptable by Wikipedia's public review process). The approach taken was feasible, and its components (outreach efforts and educational activities) were mutually beneficial. The lessons learned from this analysis can guide the development of similar future activities across different disciplines.
Wiki4WorldHearingDay2023: quantitative assessment
Editing Wikipedia was a new type of activity for more than half of the participants of Wiki4WorldHearingDay2023; nonetheless only two of the 39 new articles developed were deleted in the scrutiny of Wikipedia’s public review process.(39) This is an indicator of the success of the effort.
Despite its limitations, the number of article views is a metric often reported when Wikipedia efforts are studied (44, 46–48). Perhaps due to initial skepticism toward Wikipedia content, the motivation behind reporting this metric was to demonstrate how widely health pages are read by the public, as well as physicians and medical students (45). In addition, information on the level of interest in a topic by both editors and the public is valuable for researchers, health care practitioners, and health communication professionals in planning and prioritizing research and communication efforts.
The 145 participants (78 from educational programs) of Wiki4WorldHearingDay2023 (39) contributed 155,000 words, 258 + references and 140 images to 283 existing and 39 new Wikipedia articles (Outreach Dashboard accessed on September 14, 2023). Given our objectives, we considered sufficient to report the results of the top 5 most visited articles on topics closely related to hearing and hearing care in the following 9 categories: hearing conditions, anatomical sites, audiological tests, treatments and rehabilitation, health care, risk factors, prevention, music, and media coverage of hearing and deafness through films. Wikipedia's content was also expanded on topics that were one-step removed from target topics but were not included in our analysis; edits to unrelated topics were not tracked.
The limitations from the number of views metric arise from not being able to exclude the number of views an article receives in the process of it being edited. More significant perhaps is that the period of tracking can be very different in events of long duration. Articles edited and tracked early in the event have longer tracking periods than those edited on the event last day. This is not an issue for short duration events, such as the Vaccine Safety Virtual Wikipedia Edit-a-ton (49).
Intersection between Wiki4WorldHearingDay2023 and educational activities
Contributions occurred in 6 languages. Students who were enrolled in this study’s educational activities edited in Portuguese and French contributed the bulk of the new content (70.2%). Edits in other languages were from volunteers who we assumed were not tasked to edit Wikipedia as part of an educational activity.
Wikipedia exists in more than 323 official language editions that meet the eligibility requisites established by the Wikimedia Foundation(50). The content of each Wikipedia edition is independent of the others, but equivalent Wikipedia articles in different languages can be linked via interlanguage links. Wikidata (a collaborative, multilingual, and machine-readable database) is used by various language-editions of Wikipedia to ensure consistency of content across the platform.
Knowledge equity and health promotion
As part of the Wikimedia Foundation Strategy Process, a goal was identified to establish a fair and quality representation of knowledge and peoples or “knowledge equity” across the different platforms in the Wikimedia movement(51). Notwithstanding the editorial freedom that editors enjoy across platforms, there are various community initiatives attempting to coordinate efforts to address various gaps and inconsistencies in content between different languages (52, 53). We argue that outreach efforts such as those described in the present study contribute to the knowledge equity goal.
In addition, the significance of this effort is magnified by its focus, given the need to increase available and accessible information on hearing health conditions and services, particularly directed to low- and middle-income countries. Expanding the availability of content in Portuguese Wikipedia can prove beneficial not only to populations in Brazil but also to other Portuguese-speaking countries or regions (Portugal, Cape Verde, Angola, Mozambique, Guinea-Bissau, São Tomé and Príncipe, East Timor, Equatorial Guinea, Goa and Macau).
Comparisons with previous studies
Previous similar efforts included Wiki4WorldHearingDay2019 and Wiki4YearOfSound2020 online programs(47). These efforts had different durations than the ones included in the present study. Wiki4WorldHearingDay2019 lasted 2 months, while Wiki4YearOfSound2020 lasted 12 months. The Brazilian student participants were involved in an extension activity for which they did not receive a grade or formal credits. Nevertheless, the group edited 37 articles, which attracted more than 220,000 views during the set tracking period. Students were responsible for 60% of the Portuguese-language edits during the Wiki4WorldHearingDay2019 campaign and more than 90% of the Portuguese-language edits during the first half of the Wiki4YearOfSound2020 campaign. Moreover, the quality indexes for pages either created or edited were improved in all situations by registering an increase rate ranging from 33–100%(47). These results are similar to those we report here (from a coursework activity to be graded and a volunteer activity from extension activities), despite the different duration of the events and differences in the type of student participation from the previous study (who were exclusively from an extension activity). The participation of students in extension activities for which they did not receive a grade suggests that the act of sharing knowledge by writing for a larger audience on a publicly accessible platform was enough to motivate participation. While the campaign greatly benefited from the participation of those who were involved in the educational programs, faculty and students reported that, in turn, their participation in Wiki4WorldHearingDay programs provided them with context, inspired them toward the work, and gave them a sense of inclusion and representation.
Informal feedback from students and instructors who participated in the present study indicated appreciation for the opportunity to improve their digital literacy and science communication skills, as well as the opportunity to combat misinformation. Instructors also communicated that writing for Wikipedia offers a unique opportunity for students to interact with interlocutors outside the academic-professional universe who are interested in the common content. They added that the topic of public health relevance, an international articulation, the connection with a robust local Wikimedia affiliate, the use of a social-technical infrastructure that gives anyone metrics and coordination mechanisms were the elements that contributed to the success of these initiatives. In other words, while educational activities greatly increased the accomplishments of outreach efforts such as Wiki4WorldHearingDay2023, in turn, being part of a global activity increased the participants’ motivation students to engage in this coursework assignment.
More formal documentation of the reactions from students who participated in education programs that include Wikipedia activities is available from previous studies (48, 54–60). A study on the perspectives from health profession educators on teaching with Wikipedia reported that two themes summarize the benefits of teaching with Wikipedia: “1) that it provides a meaningful instructional alternative while helping society and developing learners’ information literacy” and “2) that Wikipedia supports learners’ careers and professional identity formation” (61). Identified challenges included extent of effort and time, restrictive Wikipedia sourcing guidelines, and difficult interactions with stakeholders(61). For information on the Wikimedia Foundation’s educational efforts, see Wikimedia Communities and Education (62).
Information gained by number of views versus extent of edits
We reported the extent of the edits completed (in number of words added). Only in a few cases the most viewed articles were those that received more extensive edits. Previous observations indicated that expanding and improving Wikipedia articles is associated with an increase in the number of views (15, 16, 30). Students, particularly when new to Wikipedia editing, are often encouraged to contribute to articles that have received a low-quality classification (information usually available for any Wikipedia article).
Our findings also made two different perspectives and motivations explicit. The views suggest that in the scope of our activities (hearing health), the motivation behind the number of views among the population at large is greater for specific hearing conditions, general information on health care, treatments, and popular portrayals of those in film. This information is valuable for those who work in health communication. From the instructors’ and students’ perspective, it was more important to select articles for development or expansion based on the subject matter of the class. Nevertheless, both results (small improvements to articles that attract a large number of edits or more extensive edits to articles not yet attracting a large number of views) contribute to our ultimate objective of increasing the availability of quality plain language health information on hearing conditions and hearing care.
Our experiences in this project can be applied in other contexts. Our approach is flexible enough to be adapted in a context-specific way for other topics, institutions, and countries. Instructors are not expected to become Wikipedia experts to incorporate Wikipedia activities in the coursework. A total of 141 Wikimedia groups exist and support people around the world to collect and develop educational content under a free license or in the public domain and to disseminate it effectively and globally(63). The Wikipedia and Education User Group is another source of support, including volunteer members, training materials and tools.(64) In the US and Canada, instructors can use support from Wiki Edu (65).
Study limitations and recommendations for future actions
While this study satisfactorily met its goals, there were limitations in our approach. The limitations associated with the metric selected for this study were discussed earlier and are inherent to Wikimedia’s Program and Events Dashboard.(38) Some of them are associated with the tracking of activities in Wikipedia in languages other than English. By the time of publication of this article, the number of references added during editing of Wikipedia articles, an important metric, is only tracked by the English Wikipedia. This and other weaknesses are in queue to be corrected in the near future.
Another limitation pertains to the different periods for tracking the number of views for editing efforts of long duration. Programs associated with an outreach campaign can address this limitation by shortening its duration. For educational activities, instructors are encouraged to consider asking students to move their edits from the sandbox to Wikipedia’s main space on the same date. Also, if organizers/instructors limited the themes to be edited or preselected specific articles to be expanded or created would make the activity easier to manage and deliver results more closely aligned to their objectives.
We did not include a separate analysis of the contributions from volunteer participants who were not part of formal educational activities, as it was not part of the objective of this study. Those who attended training events provided meaningful contributions in several languages (English, Portuguese, Spanish and Chinese). For future studies, we recommend comparing the extent and quality of contribution by volunteers who participated in training events and those who did not.
In addition we did not track or compare contributions by individuals versus the contributions of groups. We suggest studies to determine the effectiveness of each method (individual work with collaborative editing). We also encourage the collection of anonymous data for student feedback.
While a quality evaluation of the contributed content would allow us to further interpret the data from this effort, such analysis would be challenging given the scale of our dataset, and it was outside the scope of the study. However, we are aware that Wikimedia offers tools to facilitate evaluation from of this perspective.
While our study demonstrated the feasibility of the approach, it was only feasible after five years of experimenting with different strategies, building of partnerships, an international articulation, the connection with a robust local Wikimedia affiliate and financial support through a grant.