Alberta Research Centre for Health Evidence, Department of Pediatrics, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada.
BMJ Open. 2013 May 9;3(5):e002819. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2013-002819.
To map the state of the existing literature evaluating the use of social media in patient and caregiver populations.
Scoping review.
Medline, CENTRAL, ERIC, PubMed, CINAHL Plus Full Text, Academic Search Complete, Alt Health Watch, Health Source, Communication and Mass Media Complete, Web of Knowledge and ProQuest (2000-2012).
Studies reporting primary research on the use of social media (collaborative projects, blogs/microblogs, content communities, social networking sites, virtual worlds) by patients or caregivers.
Two reviewers screened studies for eligibility; one reviewer extracted data from relevant studies and a second performed verification for accuracy and completeness on a 10% sample. Data were analysed to describe which social media tools are being used, by whom, for what purpose and how they are being evaluated.
Two hundred eighty-four studies were included. Discussion forums were highly prevalent and constitute 66.6% of the sample. Social networking sites (14.8%) and blogs/microblogs (14.1%) were the next most commonly used tools. The intended purpose of the tool was to facilitate self-care in 77.1% of studies. While there were clusters of studies that focused on similar conditions (eg, lifestyle/weight loss (12.7%), cancer (11.3%)), there were no patterns in the objectives or tools used. A large proportion of the studies were descriptive (42.3%); however, there were also 48 (16.9%) randomised controlled trials (RCTs). Among the RCTs, 35.4% reported statistically significant results favouring the social media intervention being evaluated; however, 72.9% presented positive conclusions regarding the use of social media.
There is an extensive body of literature examining the use of social media in patient and caregiver populations. Much of this work is descriptive; however, with such widespread use, evaluations of effectiveness are required. In studies that have examined effectiveness, positive conclusions are often reported, despite non-significant findings.
绘制现有文献评估社交媒体在患者和照护者群体中应用的状态图。
范围综述。
Medline、CENTRAL、ERIC、PubMed、CINAHL Plus 全文、Academic Search Complete、Alt Health Watch、Health Source、Communication and Mass Media Complete、Web of Knowledge 和 ProQuest(2000-2012 年)。
报告患者或照护者使用社交媒体(协作项目、博客/微博、内容社区、社交网络、虚拟世界)的原始研究的研究。
两名评审员筛选符合条件的研究;一名评审员从相关研究中提取数据,另一名评审员对 10%的样本进行准确性和完整性验证。对数据进行分析,以描述正在使用哪些社交媒体工具、由谁使用、用于什么目的以及如何进行评估。
共纳入 284 项研究。讨论论坛非常普遍,占样本的 66.6%。社交网络(14.8%)和博客/微博(14.1%)是下一个最常用的工具。该工具的预期目的是促进 77.1%的研究中的自我护理。虽然有一些研究集中在相似的疾病(如生活方式/减肥(12.7%)、癌症(11.3%)),但在目标或使用的工具方面没有模式。很大一部分研究是描述性的(42.3%);然而,也有 48 项(16.9%)随机对照试验(RCT)。在 RCT 中,35.4%报告了有利于所评估的社交媒体干预的统计学显著结果;然而,72.9%对社交媒体的使用提出了积极的结论。
有大量文献研究社交媒体在患者和照护者群体中的应用。这项工作的大部分是描述性的;然而,由于广泛使用,需要评估有效性。在已经研究了有效性的研究中,往往会报告积极的结论,尽管没有显著的发现。