Abstract Purpose This study analyzes the way that firm-generated content (FGC) was adapted in the accommodation sector through hotel chains' Facebook posts at a time of crisis. Specifically, this research aims to: (1) explore hidden topics in hotel chains' FGC; (2) classify topics according to their promotional or non-promotional content; and (3) compare topics during the first months of the COVID-19 crisis and the same months of 2019. Theoretical framework The method/theoretical approach used in this research is social network analysis. Design/methodology/approach We used content analysis to examine 1,317 Facebook posts from the five hotel chains with the greatest presence in Spain. NodeXL software was used to create a semantic network to reveal the relationships between the ideas embedded in the text collection. Findings 14 latent topics were found in each period, including promotional and non-promotional content. Non-promotional topics increased from one third in 2019 to more than half in 2020, and the most relevant topic in 2020 was “Competitions”. Practical & social implications of the research The findings of our study suggest that during the pandemic, unlike other crises, hotel chains used Facebook to accompany users, entertain them, and maintain the emotional connection with the brand, responding to societal demands. Originality/value This study is novel not only because of its focus on FGC in the tourist accommodation sector, but also because it uses semantic network analysis to study the way in which firms make use of social media in crisis situations.

ABSTRACT Background: Implementation of Shared Decision Making (SDM) in oncology is limited. The objective of the study was to determine the extent of physicians' awareness of Shared Decision Making (SDM) in their treatment of cancer patients, the usefulness that they assign to SDM, the role they play, their assessment of SDM, and perceptions of the main barriers and facilitators to its use. Methods: A questionnaire was completed by medical oncologists, radiation oncologists and general surgeons working in Andalusia (Spain). Sociodemographic, clinical-care and aspects of SDM variables were collected. SDM was evaluated using the SDM-Q-Doc questionnaire. Non-parametric contrasts were used to determine the possible differences between medical specialties. Results: The questionnaire was sent to 351 physicians. The response rate was 37.04%, 63 women and 67 men, with an average age of 45.6 years and 18.04 years' experience. Of these, 33.08% were medical oncologists, 34.61% radiation oncologists and 29.23% general surgeons. A total of 82.3% stated they had received no training in SDM, whereas 33.8% said they knew a lot about SDM and applied it in practice; 80% considered it to be very useful. In addition, 60% of respondents said they were mainly the ones who made the decisions on treatment. An evaluation of SDM on the SDM-Q-Doc scale showed that all the specialities scored more than 80/100. The main barriers to applying SDM were the difficulty patients experienced in understanding what they needed to know, the lack of decision aids and time. Conclusions: Some 82% of physicians have no training in SDM and 66% don´t use it in practice, with decisions on treatment taken mainly by the physicians themselves. Strategies to increase training in SDM and to implement it into clinical practice are important.

RESUMEN Fundamentos: La implementación de la Toma de Decisiones Compartidas (TDC) en oncología es escasa. El objetivo del estudio fue determinar el conocimiento de la TDC que tienen los médicos que tratan a pacientes con cáncer, la utilidad que le conceden, el rol que desempeñan, la evaluación que hacen, y las barreras y facilitadores que encuentran para su uso. Métodos: Se realizó una encuesta a oncólogos médicos, oncólogos radioterápicos y cirujanos generales que ejercían en Andalucía (España). Se recogieron variables sociodemográficas, clínico-asistenciales y de aspectos de la TDC. La TDC se evaluó mediante el cuestionario SDM-Q-Doc. Se emplearon contrastes no paramétricos para determinar las posibles diferencias entre especialidades médicas. Resultados: El cuestionario se envió a 351 médicos y la tasa de respuesta fue del 37,04%. Respondieron 63 mujeres y 67 hombres, con un promedio de 45,6 años de edad y 18,04 años de experiencia. El 33,08% eran oncólogos médicos, el 34,61% oncólogos radioterápicos y el 29,23% cirujanos generales. El 82,3% no tenía formación en TDC y el 33,8% reconocía saber bastante y utilizarla en su práctica habitual. El 80% consideró que era muy útil. El 60% respondió que la decisión sobre el tratamiento la tomaban mayormente ellos. Al evaluar la TDC con la escala SDM-Q-Doc, todas las especialidades obtuvieron más de 80 puntos sobre 100. Las principales barreras para aplicar la TDC fueron la dificultad del paciente para entender lo que necesitaba saber, la falta de instrumentos de apoyo, así como la falta de tiempo. Conclusiones: Un 82% de los médicos no tiene formación en TDC y un 66% no la utiliza en su práctica habitual, tomando la decisión sobre el tratamiento mayoritariamente ellos. Es importante adoptar estrategias para aumentar la formación en TDC e implementarla en la práctica clínica diaria.

ABSTRACT Background: Implementation of Shared Decision Making (SDM) in oncology is limited. The objective of the study was to determine the extent of physicians' awareness of Shared Decision Making (SDM) in their treatment of cancer patients, the usefulness that they assign to SDM, the role they play, their assessment of SDM, and perceptions of the main barriers and facilitators to its use. Methods: A questionnaire was completed by medical oncologists, radiation oncologists and general surgeons working in Andalusia (Spain). Sociodemographic, clinical-care and aspects of SDM variables were collected. SDM was evaluated using the SDM-Q-Doc questionnaire. Non-parametric contrasts were used to determine the possible differences between medical specialties. Results: The questionnaire was sent to 351 physicians. The response rate was 37.04%, 63 women and 67 men, with an average age of 45.6 years and 18.04 years' experience. Of these, 33.08% were medical oncologists, 34.61% radiation oncologists and 29.23% general surgeons. A total of 82.3% stated they had received no training in SDM, whereas 33.8% said they knew a lot about SDM and applied it in practice; 80% considered it to be very useful. In addition, 60% of respondents said they were mainly the ones who made the decisions on treatment. An evaluation of SDM on the SDM-Q-Doc scale showed that all the specialities scored more than 80/100. The main barriers to applying SDM were the difficulty patients experienced in understanding what they needed to know, the lack of decision aids and time. Conclusions: Some 82% of physicians have no training in SDM and 66% don´t use it in practice, with decisions on treatment taken mainly by the physicians themselves. Strategies to increase training in SDM and to implement it into clinical practice are important.

RESUMEN Fundamentos: La implementación de la Toma de Decisiones Compartidas (TDC) en oncología es escasa. El objetivo del estudio fue determinar el conocimiento de la TDC que tienen los médicos que tratan a pacientes con cáncer, la utilidad que le conceden, el rol que desempeñan, la evaluación que hacen, y las barreras y facilitadores que encuentran para su uso. Métodos: Se realizó una encuesta a oncólogos médicos, oncólogos radioterápicos y cirujanos generales que ejercían en Andalucía (España). Se recogieron variables sociodemográficas, clínico-asistenciales y de aspectos de la TDC. La TDC se evaluó mediante el cuestionario SDM-Q-Doc. Se emplearon contrastes no paramétricos para determinar las posibles diferencias entre especialidades médicas. Resultados: El cuestionario se envió a 351 médicos y la tasa de respuesta fue del 37,04%. Respondieron 63 mujeres y 67 hombres, con un promedio de 45,6 años de edad y 18,04 años de experiencia. El 33,08% eran oncólogos médicos, el 34,61% oncólogos radioterápicos y el 29,23% cirujanos generales. El 82,3% no tenía formación en TDC y el 33,8% reconocía saber bastante y utilizarla en su práctica habitual. El 80% consideró que era muy útil. El 60% respondió que la decisión sobre el tratamiento la tomaban mayormente ellos. Al evaluar la TDC con la escala SDM-Q-Doc, todas las especialidades obtuvieron más de 80 puntos sobre 100. Las principales barreras para aplicar la TDC fueron la dificultad del paciente para entender lo que necesitaba saber, la falta de instrumentos de apoyo, así como la falta de tiempo. Conclusiones: Un 82% de los médicos no tiene formación en TDC y un 66% no la utiliza en su práctica habitual, tomando la decisión sobre el tratamiento mayoritariamente ellos. Es importante adoptar estrategias para aumentar la formación en TDC e implementarla en la práctica clínica diaria.