Kristine Alpi

Questions of how to sustain interest in the history of medicine and broader health sciences (HOM/HS) in a changing institutional environment, and how to collaborate with stakeholders to offer activities to do so, are on the radar for many academic health sciences centers and their libraries. This essay is an initial exploratory study of non-curricular HOM/HS efforts at United States medical schools ranked in the top thirty in primary care or research. In 2019, we collected public information pertinent to any presence of an on-campus HOM/HS community and the group’s structure, including funding, activities, and the library’s involvement with the group. Seventeen of forty-five institutions in the sample presented information about an institutional HOM/HS group. All posted a mission statement. Their funding varied in nature; some collected fees from members, while others relied on university support. Half were student-led. Most groups hosted regular lecture series, with fifteen groups hosting at least one annually. Six groups sponsored publications or awards. These findings indicate that several institutions with active programs offer potential models and lessons for sustaining HOM/HS communities. Beyond providing a physical or digital space in which HOM/HS groups connect, libraries play an active role in fostering some of these communities.

Background The purpose of this study was to replicate in the veterinary context a BMJ study using Google to assist in diagnosis of complex cases. Hypothesis/Objectives To assess percentage of diagnoses identified using Google as a diagnostic aid in veterinary medicine. Animals None; 13 cases in cats and 17 in dogs published in JAVMA. Methods Cross‐sectional survey of Google results from searches using keywords generated independently by a generalist and a specialist veterinarian who reviewed the published case history and diagnostic components while blind to the diagnosis. They offered diagnoses and generated up to 5 search strategies for each case. The top 30 Google results for each search were reviewed by the generalist to inform a final Google‐aided diagnosis. Both veterinarians' initial diagnoses and the Google‐aided diagnoses were compared with the published diagnoses. Results Google searching led to 52 diagnoses out of 60 possible. Twenty‐two (42%, 95% confidence interval [95% CI] 29%‐55%) Google‐aided diagnoses matched the JAVMA diagnosis. This accuracy rate does not differ significantly from 58% (n = 15/26, 95% CI 38%‐77%) identified in the BMJ study. Google‐aided results were not statistically different from those achieved unaided by each veterinarian (33%, 95% CI 16%‐50%). Conclusions and Clinical Importance Published information found searching Google using keywords related to complicated or unusual cases could assist veterinarians to reinforce their initial diagnosis or consider other differential diagnoses. Search strategies using words representing either signs or the preliminary diagnoses can yield results useful to confirming a correct diagnosis.