Digital Identity in Academic Urology: Assessment of Female Pelvic Medicine and Reconstructive Surgery, and Opportunity for Improvement

Abstract

IntroductionWe describe the digital identity of academic urologists in FPMRS (Female Pelvic Medicine and Reconstructive Surgery) by assessing their visible online information. MethodsA Google™ search of SUFU (Society of Urodynamics, Female Pelvic Medicine and Urogenital Reconstruction) board members, past presidents and fellowship directors was completed. Hits on the first page of results were categorized as institutional page, group/society page, ratings site, interview/multimedia, journal article or book, social media, professional profile or another person. Sites were subclassified as physician controllable content or not controllable. Descriptive statistics, comparisons among SUFU roles and site type associations were calculated. ResultsFirst page results contained a median (Q1–Q3) of 11 (10–11) hits with 2 (2–3) institutional pages and 1 (1–2) group/society. Ratings sites were frequent returns, with 4 hits (3–5) in 98% of searches (60). Only 1 (1–1) social media, 1 (1–2) professional profile and 1 (1–2) interview/multimedia hits occurred. Overall 6 (5–7) sites were physician controllable content with all but 1 physician having at least 1 such result. Institutional (correlation coefficient −0.38, p = 0.001) or group/society (−0.34, p = 0.023) pages were associated with fewer ratings sites. Group/society pages were 3.41 times more prevalent (mean 11.7% vs 3.44%, p = 0.009) among SUFU board members, while past presidents had 3.03 (6.8% vs 2.3%, p = 0.046) times more journal articles or books and fellowship directors had 1.43 (25.6% vs 18.6%, p = 0.021) times more institutional pages. ConclusionsFor active SUFU members ratings sites comprise a substantial portion of their search results. More online engagement or social media use could increase the visibility of physician controllable content in their digital identities.