Golder Su, Norman Gill, Loke Yoon K
Department of Health Sciences, University of York, York, YO10 5DD, UK.
School of Nursing, Midwifery & Social Work, University of Manchester, Room 5.328, Jean McFarlane Building, Oxford Road, Manchester, M13 9PL, UK.
Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2015 Oct;80(4):878-88. doi: 10.1111/bcp.12746. Epub 2015 Sep 16.
The aim of this review was to summarize the prevalence, frequency and comparative value of information on the adverse events of healthcare interventions from user comments and videos in social media.
A systematic review of assessments of the prevalence or type of information on adverse events in social media was undertaken. Sixteen databases and two internet search engines were searched in addition to handsearching, reference checking and contacting experts. The results were sifted independently by two researchers. Data extraction and quality assessment were carried out by one researcher and checked by a second. The quality assessment tool was devised in-house and a narrative synthesis of the results followed.
From 3064 records, 51 studies met the inclusion criteria. The studies assessed over 174 social media sites with discussion forums (71%) being the most popular. The overall prevalence of adverse events reports in social media varied from 0.2% to 8% of posts. Twenty-nine studies compared the results from searching social media with using other data sources to identify adverse events. There was general agreement that a higher frequency of adverse events was found in social media and that this was particularly true for 'symptom' related and 'mild' adverse events. Those adverse events that were under-represented in social media were laboratory-based and serious adverse events.
Reports of adverse events are identifiable within social media. However, there is considerable heterogeneity in the frequency and type of events reported, and the reliability or validity of the data has not been thoroughly evaluated.
本综述的目的是总结社交媒体中用户评论和视频里医疗保健干预措施不良事件信息的发生率、出现频率及比较价值。
对社交媒体中不良事件信息的发生率或类型评估进行系统综述。除了手工检索、参考文献核对及联系专家外,还检索了16个数据库和两个互联网搜索引擎。结果由两名研究人员独立筛选。数据提取和质量评估由一名研究人员进行,另一名研究人员进行核对。质量评估工具是内部设计的,随后对结果进行了叙述性综合分析。
从3064条记录中,51项研究符合纳入标准。这些研究评估了174多个社交媒体网站,其中讨论论坛最受欢迎(占71%)。社交媒体中不良事件报告的总体发生率在帖子的0.2%至8%之间。29项研究比较了通过社交媒体搜索与使用其他数据源识别不良事件的结果。人们普遍认为,社交媒体中发现的不良事件频率更高,对于与“症状”相关的和“轻度”不良事件尤其如此。在社交媒体中报道不足的不良事件是基于实验室的不良事件和严重不良事件。
社交媒体中可识别出不良事件报告。然而,所报告事件的频率和类型存在相当大的异质性,且数据的可靠性或有效性尚未得到充分评估。