4.6 Review

Social Media Use in Chronic Disease: A Systematic Review and Novel Taxonomy

期刊

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF MEDICINE
卷 128, 期 12, 页码 1335-1350

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.amjmed.2015.06.015

关键词

Chronic disease; Social media; Social media taxonomy; Taxonomy

向作者/读者索取更多资源

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study is to evaluate clinical outcomes from applications of contemporary social media in chronic disease; to develop a conceptual taxonomy to categorize, summarize, and then analyze the current evidence base; and to suggest a framework for future studies on this topic. METHODS: We performed a systematic review of MEDLINE via PubMed (January 2000 to January 2015) of studies reporting clinical outcomes on leading contemporary social media (ie, Facebook, Twitter, Wikipedia, YouTube) use in 10 chronic diseases. Two reviewers independently performed data extraction and quality assessment; characterization of study outcomes as positive, negative, neutral, or undefined impact; and inductive, thematic analysis to develop our taxonomy. RESULTS: Of 378 citations identified, 42 studies examining the use of Facebook (n = 16), blogs (n = 13), Twitter (n = 8), wikis (n = 5), and YouTube (n = 4) on outcomes in cancer (n = 14), depression (n = 13), obesity (n = 9), diabetes (n = 4), heart disease (n = 3), stroke (n = 2), and chronic lower respiratory tract infection (n = 1) were included. Studies were classified as support (n = 16), patient education (n = 10), disease modification (n = 6), disease management (n = 5), and diagnosis (n = 5) within our taxonomy. The overall impact of social media on chronic disease was variable, with 48% of studies indicating benefit, 45% neutral or undefined, and 7% suggesting harm. Among studies that showed benefit, 85% used either Facebook or blogs, and 40% were based within the domain of support. CONCLUSIONS: Using social media to provide social, emotional, or experiential support in chronic disease, especially with Facebook and blogs, appears most likely to improve patient care. (C) 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据