Logics, tensions and negotiations in the everyday life of a news-ranking algorithm

This article attends to tensions and negotiations surrounding the introduction and development of a news-ranking algorithm in a Swedish daily. Approaching algorithms as culture, being composed of collective human practices, the study emphasizes socio-institutional dynamics in the everyday life of the algorithm. The focus on tensions and negotiations is justified from an institutional perspective and operationalized through an analytical framework of logics. Empirically the study is based on interviews with 14 different in-house workers at the daily, journalists as well as programmers and market actors. The study shows that logics connected to both journalism and programming co-developed the news-ranking algorithm. Tensions and their negotiations around these logics contributed to its very development. One example is labeling of the algorithm as editor-led, allowing journalists to oversee some of its parameters. Social practices in the newsroom, such as Algorithm-Coffee, was also important for its development. In other words, different actors, tensions between them and how these were negotiated, co-constituted by the algorithm itself.

Analysis of hematology and oncology fellowship website content and diversity representation.

11004 Background: Fellowship in hematology and oncology (HO) is widely sought after but lags behind all other internal medicine subspecialties in attracting applicants underrepresented in medicine (URM). An approach to appealing to URMs involves preexisting in-person strategies but also adapting virtual tools to promote inclusion. Specifically, program websites serve as the first impressions of a program, as well as influence the perception of diversity and inclusion. We evaluated the content and diversity representation of HO program websites to facilitate a generally more informed and URM-considerate recruitment. Methods: The websites of 2019-2020 ACGME accredited HO programs were assessed between June 1st to July 1st, 2020. Data focused on 30 informational categories, derived from published methodology, along with three additional categories concerning diversity, based on suggestions for inclusive graduate medical education recruitment strategies, were compared using two-tailed t tests. We defined websites with 70% or more of the 30 informational categories as “comprehensive websites.” Affiliation with a National Cancer Institute (NCI) Designated Cancer Center, NCI Designated Cancer Center + National Cancer Center Network (NCCN) member institution, and a top 50 ranked cancer hospital by U.S. News was also considered in the analysis. Results: A total of 156 program websites were analyzed: 37.2% NCI; 19.9% NCCN; 29.5% U.S. News ranked. Only 31 (19.9%) were “comprehensive websites,” and 34 (21.8%) had information pertaining to at least one of the diversity categories. There was a significant association between inclusion of diversity content and being a “comprehensive website” (p = 0.001). Compared to those that were neither designated nor ranked, programs designated by NCI, NCCN, or ranked by U.S. News were more likely to have more complete information available (p < 0.001, = 0.008, and < 0.001, respectively). However, only programs ranked by U.S. News were more likely to include information about diversity on their websites (p = 0.006). Conclusions: The vast majority of HO fellowship program websites were not comprehensive, including a lack of diversity and inclusivity content. NCI designation, NCCN participation, and US News ranking were significantly associated with more complete fellowship websites. Given the context of the COVID-19 pandemic in which institution visitation is restricted, program websites may have elevated importance in recruitment. HO programs should direct resources to offering more complete and inclusive websites to better inform applicants, including URM residents.

U.S. News & World Report Ophthalmology Hospital Rankings and Research Productivity

Introduction Despite the wide usage of U.S. News & World Report (U.S. News) rankings of ophthalmology hospitals among the public, residency applicants, and ophthalmologists, there is disagreement in the literature on the role of quality of care, research productivity, and other factors in the ranking system. This study investigated the association of U.S. News ranking of ophthalmology hospitals and objective measures of research productivity. Methods The 2020 U.S. News “Best Hospitals for Ophthalmology” ranking lists 38 hospitals by reputation score and numerically ranks the top 12 institutions. For our analysis, top 12 hospitals were classified as group A and the remaining 26 as group B. The Clinicaltrials.gov, National Institutes of Health (NIH) Research Portfolio Online Reporting Tools Expenditures and Results (RePORTER), and NIH Research Portfolio Online Reporting Tools (RePORT) were systematically searched for total clinical trials, NIH funding, and the National Eye Institute (NEI) funding for fiscal years 2017, 2018, and 2019. Faculty size and the number of publications by ophthalmology faculty per hospital were recorded from a previous study in 2016. Results Independent measures of research productivity significantly associated with group A status after multivariate logistic regression analysis were mean faculty Hirsch's index (h-index) over 15 (odds ratio [OR]: 6.13, 95% confidence interval [CI]: [1.14–32.94]) and conducting five or more total clinical trials (OR: 8.77, 95% CI: [1.39–55.16]). Conclusion This study suggests that the reputation-based U.S. News ranking may serve as a proxy for an ophthalmology department's contribution to research measured by mean faculty h-index and number of clinical trials.

College Affordability and U.S. News & World Report Rankings:

In an era of billions of dollars in outstanding student loan debt, researchers have posited that the U.S. News & World Report rankings continue to be an influential source of information for prospective students, yet these rankings do not include college affordability metrics in their ranking algorithm. As a result, this study performed a series of college affordability experiments by integrating affordability metrics into the U.S. News ranking algorithm to explore whether any affordability metric predicts overall ranking. Results suggest better ranked institutions enrolled lower percentages of Pell grant receiving students (p < 0.00), while the percentage of undergraduates receiving state aid predicted better rankings only at Regional Midwest and Regional West Universities (p < 0.05). These results suggest many college affordability metrics are not predictive of ranking among the best-ranked, elite institutions. Implications for theory, practice, and college student choice are addressed.