The DOI matches its Crossref record; 18 of the 18 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Online professionalism and the mirror of social media.
Open accessAbstract
The rise of social media--content created by Internet users and hosted by popular sites such as Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, and Wikipedia, and blogs--has brought several new hazards for medical professionalism. First, many physicians may find applying principles for medical professionalism to the online environment challenging in certain contexts. Second, physicians may not consider the potential impact of their online content on their patients and the public. Third, a momentary lapse in judgment by an individual physician to create unprofessional content online can reflect poorly on the entire profession. To overcome these challenges, we encourage individual physicians to realize that as they "tread" through the World Wide Web, they leave behind a "footprint" that may have unintended negative consequences for them and for the profession at large. We also recommend that institutions take a proactive approach to engage users of social media in setting consensus-based standards for "online professionalism." Finally, given that professionalism encompasses more than the avoidance of negative behaviors, we conclude with examples of more positive applications for this technology. Much like a mirror, social media can reflect the best and worst aspects of the content placed before it for all to see.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Patient privacy breaches can cause much greater harm when occurring online than when face-to-face given the potential wide reach of social media and the permanency of digital information.36”
From Social Media and Clinical Care: Ethical, Professional, and Social Implications (2013) · cites this paper as [36]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredIn the citing paper
“the academic literature replete with admonishments of how SM are dangerously breeching the old “boundary markers” of medicine: enabling all manner of distasteful content to be publically posted by medical students, residents, and other healthcare providers,7,14–17”
From Dangers and Opportunities for Social Media in Medicine (2013) · cites this paper as [17]
In the citing paper
“Professionals, not limited to physicians, have had their professional character judged on the basis of the way they represent themselves online; 36 to some extent, physicians will be viewed in their professional role whenever they are in public, including when using social media.37”
From Social Media and Clinical Care: Ethical, Professional, and Social Implications (2013) · cites this paper as [36]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
The online disinhibition effect
Suler, J. (2004) · CyberPsychology & Behavior · doi:10.1089/1094931041291295 · Cited by 4,375
Medical Professionalism in the New Millennium: A Physician Charter
Project of the ABIM Foundation, A. F. (2002) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/0003-4819-136-3-200202050-00012 · Cited by 1,624
Medical professionalism in the new millennium: a physician charter
(2002) · Obstetrics & Gynecology · doi:10.1016/s0029-7844(02)02082-3 · Cited by 1,021
Hawn, C. (2009) · Health Affairs · doi:10.1377/hlthaff.28.2.361 · Cited by 821
Online Posting of Unprofessional Content by Medical Students
Chretien, K. C. (2009) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.2009.1387 · Cited by 448
Self-citationThe Intersection of Online Social Networking with Medical Professionalism
Thompson, L. A., Dawson, K., Ferdig, R., Black, E. W., Boyer, J., Coutts, J., & Black, N. P. (2008) · Journal of General Internal Medicine · doi:10.1007/s11606-008-0538-8 · Cited by 425
Content of Weblogs Written by Health Professionals
Lagu, T., Kaufman, E. J., Asch, D. A., & Armstrong, K. (2008) · Journal of General Internal Medicine · doi:10.1007/s11606-008-0726-6 · Cited by 255
Practicing Medicine in the Age of Facebook
Jain, S. H. (2009) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmp0901277 · Cited by 179
Medical professionalism in the age of online social networking
Guseh, J. S., Brendel, R. W., & Brendel, D. H. (2009) · Journal of Medical Ethics · doi:10.1136/jme.2009.029231 · Cited by 165
Chretien, K. C., Goldman, E. F., & Faselis, C. J. (2008) · Journal of General Internal Medicine · doi:10.1007/s11606-008-0796-5 · Cited by 129
Self-citationItʼs Your Own Risk: Medical Studentsʼ Perspectives on Online Professionalism
Chretien, K. C., Goldman, E. F., Beckman, L., & Kind, T. (2010) · Academic Medicine · doi:10.1097/acm.0b013e3181ed4778 · Cited by 111
Self-citationCommentary: The Relationship Status of Digital Media and Professionalism: Itʼs Complicated
Farnan, J. M., Paro, J. A. M., Higa, J. T., Reddy, S. T., Humphrey, H. J., & Arora, V. M. (2009) · Academic Medicine · doi:10.1097/acm.0b013e3181bb17af · Cited by 68
Googling Ourselves — What Physicians Can Learn from Online Rating Sites
Jain, S. (2010) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmp0903473 · Cited by 66
Web searching for information about physicians
Gorrindo, T. (2008) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.2008.44 · Cited by 54
Learning to connect: Students’ reflections on doctor–patient interactions
Kind, T., Everett, V. R., & Ottolini, M. C. (2008) · Patient Education and Counseling · doi:10.1016/j.pec.2008.09.011 · Cited by 44
Self-citationHenderson, D., Carson-Stevens, A., Bohnen, J., Gutnik, L., Hafiz, S., & Mills, S. (2010) · Journal of Patient Safety · doi:10.1097/pts.0b013e3181d23411 · Cited by 29
Farnan, J. M., Higa, J. T., Paro, J. A. M., Reddy, S. T., Humphrey, H. J., & Arora, V. M. (2010) · AJOB Primary Research · doi:10.1080/21507711003697527 · Cited by 13
Connecting online Social media a big part of office ‘toolkit’ for tech-savvy pediatricians
O’Keefe, L. (2010) · AAP News · doi:10.1542/aapnews.2010312-16 · Cited by 1
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Antheunis, M. L., Tates, K., & Nieboer, T. E. (2013) · Patient Education and Counseling · doi:10.1016/j.pec.2013.06.020 · Cited by 632
“Since there have already been several lawsuits against physicians whom patients accused of violating the privacy of medical information [9,17,24,27], doctors may also be reluctant to communicate with patients online.”
BackgroundSocial Media and Clinical Care: Ethical, Professional, and Social Implications
Chretien, K. C., & Kind, T. (2013) · Circulation · doi:10.1161/circulationaha.112.128017 · Cited by 355
“Patient privacy breaches can cause much greater harm when occurring online than when face-to-face given the potential wide reach of social media and the permanency of digital information.(36) Patients who desire to communicate with their healthcare provider via social media should be made aware of the privacy protecti…”
BackgroundInfluentialSelf-citationDangers and Opportunities for Social Media in Medicine
GEORGE, D. R., ROVNIAK, L. S., & KRASCHNEWSKI, J. L. (2013) · Clinical Obstetrics & Gynecology · doi:10.1097/grf.0b013e318297dc38 · Cited by 352
Social media use among patients and caregivers: a scoping review
Hamm, M. P., Chisholm, A., Shulhan, J., Milne, A., Scott, S. D., Given, L. M., & Hartling, L. (2013) · BMJ Open · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2013-002819 · Cited by 348
The Patient–Doctor Relationship and Online Social Networks: Results of a National Survey
Bosslet, G. T., Torke, A. M., Hickman, S. E., Terry, C. L., & Helft, P. R. (2011) · Journal of General Internal Medicine · doi:10.1007/s11606-011-1761-2 · Cited by 306
Metadata
- Authors
- Greysen, S. R., Kind, T., & Chretien, K. C.
- Affiliations
- Yale University (US)
- Children's National (US)
- George Washington University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Greysen, S. Ryan
- Venue
- Journal of General Internal Medicine
- Published
- 2010-07-15
- Volume
- 25
- Issue
- 11
- Pages
- 1227-1229
- ISSN
- 0884-8734 (ISSN-L)
- 1525-1497
- PMC
- PMC2947638
- OpenAlex
- W2163962302
- Cited by
- 323
- References
- 18
- Citations by year
- 2026: 10 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 15 · 2021: 14 · 2020: 26 · 2019: 18 · 2018: 17 · 2017: 24 · 2016: 26 · 2015: 30 · 2014: 30 · 2013: 36 · 2012: 26
- FWCI
- 26.15
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Licence
- www.springer.com/tdm (tdm)
- Locations
- Journal of General Internal Medicine (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Health › Social Media in Health Education
- Social Sciences › Education › Innovations in Medical Education
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health, Medicine and Society
- Keywords
- medical professionalism, social media, online professionalism, professional conduct, physician-patient relationship, professional reputation
- MeSH terms
- Humans, Online Systems, Physician-Patient Relations, Physicians, Social Behavior, Internet
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
