CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 306Social Media in Health EducationHealth Literacy and Information AccessibilityImpact of Technology on Adolescents

The Patient–Doctor Relationship and Online Social Networks: Results of a National Survey

Open access
Bosslet, Gabriel T., Torke, Alexia M., Hickman, Susan E., Terry, Colin L., Helft, Paul R.·2011·Journal of General Internal Medicine
DOI 10.1007/s11606-011-1761-2PMC PMC3181288
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Background The use of online social networks (OSNs) among physicians and physicians-in-training, the extent of patient-doctor interactions within OSNs, and attitudes among these groups toward use of OSNs is not well described. Objective To quantify the use of OSNs, patient interactions within OSNs, and attitudes toward OSNs among medical students (MS), resident physicians (RP), and practicing physicians (PP) in the United States. Design/setting A random, stratified mail survey was sent to 1004 MS, 1004 RP, and 1004 PP between February and May 2010. Measurements Percentage of respondents reporting OSN use, the nature and frequency of use; percentage of respondents reporting friend requests by patients or patients' family members, frequency of these requests, and whether or not they were accepted; attitudes toward physician use of OSNs and online patient interactions. Results The overall response rate was 16.0% (19.8% MS, 14.3% RP, 14.1% PP). 93.5% of MS, 79.4% of RP, and 41.6% of PP reported usage of OSNs. PP were more likely to report having visited the profile of a patient or patient's family member (MS 2.3%, RP 3.9%, PP 15.5%), and were more likely to have received friend requests from patients or their family members (MS 1.2%, RP 7.8%, PP 34.5%). A majority did not think it ethically acceptable to interact with patients within OSNs for either social (68.3%) or patient-care (68.0%) reasons. Almost half of respondents (48.7%) were pessimistic about the potential for OSNs to…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s11606-011-1761-2

Cites

19 of 19 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Claims the paper makes

1 of 15 cited sources checked · 1 supported · 0 flagged

  • Findingown data

    Practicing physicians were more likely to have received friend requests from patients or their family members than medical students or resident physicians.

    “and were more likely to have received friend requests from patients or their family members (MS 1.2%, RP 7.8%, PP 34.5%).”
    • Also stated in: § Patient-doctor Interactions within Online Social Networks · plain
      “Significantly more practicing physicians reported receiving friend requests from patients or family members then either resident physicians or medical students (MS 1.2%, RP 7.8%, PP 34.5%; p=0.007 for MS vs. RP, p< 0.001 for MS vs. PP and RP vs. PP).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Findingown data

    A majority of all three groups reported using OSNs for personal use only.

    “A majority of all three groups reported using OSNs for personal use only (MS 95.9%, RP 97.0%, PP 95.0%), and very few respondents used OSNs for professional purposes (MS 4.1%, RP 3.0%, PP 10.1%).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Findingown data

    There were no statistically significant differences among the three groups for any of the attitude responses.

    “There were no statistically significant differences among the three groups for any of the responses.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Findingown data

    Medical students were more likely to report OSN usage than resident or practicing physicians.

    “Medical students were more likely to report usage of OSNs than resident or practicing physicians (MS 93.5%, RP 79.4%, PP 41.6%; p<0.001 for all pairwise comparisons).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Findingown data

    A larger proportion of practicing physicians reported being aware of a patient or patient's family member visiting their own personal OSN profile than medical students or resident physicians.

    “A larger proportion of PP reported being aware of a patient or patient's family member visiting their own personal OSN profile (MS 1.2%, RP 8.3%, PP 28.1%; p=0.006 for MS vs. RP, p<0.001 for MS vs. PP, p=0.002 for RP vs. PP).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. 8
  • May combine two claims. 16
  • The quote only partly states this claim. 1

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Thompson et al. describe that 44.5% of medical students and resident physicians at a single public medical school and its affiliated hospital use OSNs.

    “Thompson et al. describe that 44.5% of medical students and resident physicians at a single public medical school and its affiliated hospital use OSNs.13”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim1 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [13] Thompson LA, Dawson K, Ferdig R, Black EW, Boyer J, Coutts J, Black NP. The intersection of online social networking with medical professionalism. J Gen Intern Med. 2008;23(7):954–957. source

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Among respondents, OSN usage was reported by 93.5% of medical students, 79.4% of resident physicians, and 41.6% of practicing physicians.

    “93.5% of MS, 79.4% of RP, and 41.6% of PP reported usage of OSNs.”
    • Also stated in: § Usage Patterns · plain
      “Medical students were more likely to report usage of OSNs than resident or practicing physicians (MS 93.5%, RP 79.4%, PP 41.6%; p<0.001 for all pairwise comparisons).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Of resident physicians who had received friend requests, 57% reported that they never accepted friend requests from patients or their families, and 43% accepted them on a case-by-case basis.

    “For those resident physicians who had received friend requests, 57% reported that they never accepted friend requests from patients or their families, and 43% reported that they accepted them on a case-by-case basis.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Among all OSN users in the survey, Facebook was the most popular site, used by 99.4% of medical student users, 96.2% of resident physician users, and 96.5% of practicing physician users.

    “Among all OSN users in this survey, Facebook was the most popular site (used by 99.4% of MS users, 96.2% of RP users, and 96.5% of PP users).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Forty-six percent of medical students, 50.0% of resident physicians, and 50.9% of practicing physicians used more than one OSN.

    “Forty-six percent of MS, 50.0% of RP, and 50.9% of PP used more than one OSN.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Forty-two percent of family practitioners who use OSNs, 38% of obstetricians who use OSNs, and 27% of pediatricians who use OSNs had received friend requests from either a patient or a patient's family member.

    “Forty two percent of family practitioners who use OSNs, 38% of obstetricians who use OSNs, and 27% of pediatricians who use OSNs had received friend requests from either a patient or a patient's family member.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims. The quote only partly states this claim.

    Findingown data

    Of practicing physicians who had received friend requests, 58% reported that they always replied 'no' to the request, and 42% accepted them on a case-by-case basis.

    “Of those who had received friend requests, 58% of practicing physicians reported that they always replied”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    While over one-third of practicing physicians had received a friend request from a patient, only 1.2% of respondents had initiated a friend request.

    “While over one-third of practicing physicians had received a friend request from a patient, only 1.2% of respondents had initiated a friend request.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Although a majority of respondents did not view patient-doctor interactions within OSNs as ethically acceptable, just over a third were either neutral or thought these interactions were ethically appropriate, and almost half (46.9%) were either neutral or thought that OSNs had potential for improving patient-doctor communication.

    “Although a majority of respondents did not view patientdoctor interactions within OSNs as ethically acceptable, just over a third of respondents were either neutral or thought these interactions were ethically appropriate, and almost half (46.9%) were either neutral or thought that OSNs had potential for improving patient-doctor communication.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    26.4% of respondents agreed that OSNs had potential to improve patient-doctor communication, and 20.5% were neutral on this question.

    “26.4% of respondents agreed that OSNs did have potential to improve patient-doctor communication; and 20.5% of respondents were neutral on this question.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Several recent reports have described patient-doctor interactions within OSNs.

    “Additionally, several recent reports have described patient-doctor interactions within OSNs.[7][8][9]”
    • Also stated in: § DISCUSSION · plain
      “Several published case reports have described patient-doctor interactions within OSNs in the medical literature.[7][8][9]17”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [7][8][9]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductnone given

    The survey instrument was piloted among ten resident and practicing physicians and underwent iterative revision by the study team.

    “The survey instrument was then piloted among ten resident and practicing physicians, and underwent iterative revision by members of the study team.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductnone given

    This study was approved by the joint Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis/Clarian Health System institutional review board.

    “This study was approved by the joint Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis/Clarian Health System institutional review board.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductown data

    The overall survey response rate was 16.0%, with subgroup response rates of 19.8% for medical students, 14.3% for resident physicians, and 14.1% for practicing physicians.

    “The overall response rate was 16.0% (19.8% MS, 14.3% RP, 14.1% PP).”
    • Also stated in: § Respondent Characteristics · plain
      “There were a total of 455 survey responses out of 2836 delivered surveys (16.0%response rate), with response rates for each subgroup as follows: 187/945 (19.8%) for MS, 131/917 (14.3%) for RP, and 137/974 (14.1%) for PP.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationcitation

    Physicians and physicians-in-training descriptively hold a variety of views regarding the ethical acceptability of patient interactions within OSNs, and the normative stance by medical professionals toward these interactions remains to be codified.

    “Physicians and physicians-in-training descriptively hold a variety of views regarding the ethical acceptability of such interactions, and the normative stance by medical professionals toward these interactions remains to be codified.17”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [17] Grover M. Defining the patient-physician relationship in the era of Facebook. Acad Med. 2010;85(8):1262. source

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Moubarak et al. reported that 73% of residents and fellows utilize Facebook.

    “Most recently, Moubarak et al. reported that 73% of residents and fellows utilize Facebook.9”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [9] Moubarak G, Guiot A, Benhamou Y, Benhamou A, Hariri S. Facebook activity of residents and fellows and its impact on the doctor-patient relationship. J Med Ethics. 2011;37(2):101–104. source

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationown data

    The fact that 34% of practicing physicians in the sample reported having received friend requests from patients supports the idea that many patients feel comfortable approaching their physicians within OSNs.

    “The fact that 34% of practicing physicians in our sample report having received friend requests from patients supports the idea that many patients feel comfortable approaching with their physicians within OSNs.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisereasoning

    Both comparative studies estimated usage rates by cross-referencing class lists with Facebook pages, leaving the possibility that usage rates were underestimated.

    “Additionally, both of these studies estimated usage rates by cross-referencing class lists with Facebook pages, leaving the possibility that usage rates were underestimated.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    The structure of OSNs is such that they can dramatically blur the line between public and private spaces.

    “The structure of OSNs are such that they can dramatically blur the line between public and private spaces.25”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [25] Rosenblum D. What anyone can know - The privacy risks of social networking sites. Ieee Security & Privacy. 2007;5(3):40–49. source

  • May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductown data

    The sample size was low and limits the generalizability of the findings.

    “Although the sample size was low and limits the generalizability of findings, it provides novel information about the use of OSNs by medical professionals.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    Surveys returned as undeliverable were excluded from the analysis (59/1004 for medical students, 87/1004 for resident physicians, and 30/1004 for practicing physicians).

    “Surveys returned as undeliverable were excluded from the analysis (59/1004 for MS, 87/1004 for RP, 30/1004 for PP).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    MacDonald et al. reported that 65% of recent medical school graduates in New Zealand reported using Facebook.

    “MacDonald et al. reported that 65% of recent medical school graduates in New Zealand reported using Facebook.18”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [18] MacDonald J, Sohn S, Ellis P. Privacy, professionalism and Facebook: a dilemma for young doctors. Med Educ. 2010;44(8):805–813. source

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Both comparative studies were carried out in 2008, and usage of OSNs was likely less common at that time.

    “However, both of the comparative studies were carried out in 2008, and usage of OSNs was likely less common at that time.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
23 of 23

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    No studies quantify the incidence of patient-doctor interactions within OSNs by practicing physicians and medical trainees.

    “Currently, there are no studies that quantify the incidence of patient-doctor interactions within OSNs by practicing physicians and medical trainees.”

  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    This is the first attempt to quantify on a national level physician and medical student use of OSNs and patient interactions therein.

    “To our knowledge, this is the first attempt to quantify on a national level physician and medical student use of OSNs and patient interactions therein.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The AMA Masterfile is recognized as one of the most complete source lists of licensed physicians and medical students in the United States.

    “The AMA Masterfile is recognized as one of the most complete source lists of licensed physicians and medical students in the United States.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    There were no existing data with which to perform power calculations for this study.

    “Because the utilization rates of OSNs and patient interaction data for these populations has not been previously studied, there were no existing data with which to perform power calculations.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The expected response rate of 25% would provide sufficient data for reasonable estimates of proportions.

    “It was felt that this would provide sufficient data for reasonable estimates of proportions, based on the survey responses.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The list of mailing addresses for potential participants is the most accurate and complete contact data contained in the AMA Masterfile.

    “We utilized the mail survey format because the list of mailing addresses for potential participants is the most accurate and complete contact data contained in the AMA Masterfile.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    A validated survey tool did not previously exist because of the lack of literature and previous studies on this topic.

    “Additionally, the lack of literature and previous studies of this topic meant that a validated survey tool did not previously exist, and had to be created in order to study this topic in this population.”
7 of 7

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 findings are weakened by the modest response rate of 12.5%, though this is similar to other online studies.

    “The findings of the study are weakened by the modest response rate of 12.5%, though this is similar to that obtained by other studies using online collection [27,42].”

    From How Doctors View and Use Social Media: A National Survey (2014) · cites this paper as [27]

    The cited paper cannot substantiate the comparison with other studies using online data collection: its Study Sample and Data Collection sections describe a mail survey, not an online survey. Respondent Characteristics reports a 16.0% response rate, although the Discussion does say that this low rate limits generalizability. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • The sample size of 1500 was selected following review of expected response rates to unsolicited, non-incentivized, online medical research surveys and in consultation with other large Australian-based surveys.

    “This sample size was selected following review of expected response rates to unsolicited, non-incentivized, online medical research surveys [27,29-32] and in consultation with other large Australian-based surveys.”

    From How Doctors View and Use Social Media: A National Survey (2014) · cites this paper as [27]

    The Study Sample section says the authors expected a 25% response rate based on previously published physician surveys, and Data Collection says no incentives were offered. But this was a mailed US survey, not an online survey, so it supports only part of the response-rate rationale for the citing paper's sample size. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • The proportion of Australian doctors receiving a friend request (19.4%) was considerably lower than the 34.5% of practicing physicians in a recent US study.

    “This figure was considerably lower than the 34.5% of practicing physicians who reported receiving such a request from a patient reported in a recent US study [27].”

    From How Doctors View and Use Social Media: A National Survey (2014) · cites this paper as [27]

    Table 3 and the Patient-doctor Interactions section report that 34.5% of practicing physicians received a friend request from a patient or a patient’s family member. The citing sentence narrows that figure to requests from patients alone, which the source does not separately establish. The Australian figure is not attributed to this US study. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Doctors' concerns about legal issues and privacy in online communication are comparable to those in other countries and remain unaltered despite guidelines published by professional organizations.

    “These concerns are comparable to those shown in other countries [27] and remain unaltered despite the development of guidelines for social media published by professional organizations before and during the study period [35-39].”

    From How Doctors View and Use Social Media: A National Survey (2014) · cites this paper as [27]

    The Attitudes Toward OSNs section reports that 79.0% of respondents thought communication with patients on social networks could compromise confidentiality, supporting the privacy-concern comparison. The paper does not establish a comparison between countries or report legal concerns. The guidelines clause is attached to other citations; its Discussion says the AMA issued its policy after this survey was completed. (LLM, conf=0.80)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Previous research in the United States showed that 2.3% of medical students had visited a patient's profile on an online social network.

    “Previous research in the United States showed that 2.3% of medical students had visited a patient’s profile on an online social network [150].”

    From Dangers and Benefits of Social Media on E-Professionalism of Health Care Professionals: Scoping Review (2021) · cites this paper as [150]

    Table 3 (page not available in our copy) reports that 4 of 174 medical-student respondents (2.3%) had visited an online social-network profile. The question included profiles of patients or patients’ family members, so the paper does not establish that 2.3% had visited a patient’s profile specifically. (LLM, conf=0.90)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. American Medical Association (2010) Professionalism in the use of social media. http://www.ama-assn.org/ama/pub/meeting/professionalism-social-media.shtml . Accessed May 3, 2011.
  2. Fletcher D. Facebook. Time. 2010;175(21):32–38.
  3. Martin BC. Don’t survey physicians! Chicago: American Medical Association; 1974.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Bosslet, G. T., Torke, A. M., Hickman, S. E., Terry, C. L., & Helft, P. R.
Affiliations
Indiana University Health (US)
Corresponding author
Bosslet, Gabriel T.
ORCID
Venue
Journal of General Internal Medicine
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2011-06-25
Volume
26
Issue
10
Pages
1168-1174
ISSN
  • 0884-8734 (ISSN-L)
  • 1525-1497
DOI
10.1007/s11606-011-1761-2
PMC
PMC3181288
OpenAlex
W2017551578
Semantic Scholar
15dfa5f2f1a3625cebaab39f7685819916fcff8c
Cited by
306
References
18
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 13 · 2023: 18 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 27 · 2020: 35 · 2019: 22 · 2018: 25 · 2017: 29 · 2016: 26 · 2015: 17 · 2014: 29 · 2013: 22 · 2012: 18
FWCI
23.50
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
www.springer.com/tdm (tdm)
Locations
  • Journal of General Internal Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Richard M. Fairbanks Foundation
  • Methodist Health Foundation
  • National Institute on Aging (K23AG031323)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Health › Social Media in Health Education
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Literacy and Information Accessibility
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Impact of Technology on Adolescents
Keywords
social networking sites, physician social media use, patient-doctor communication, medical students, medical residents, practicing physicians, patient confidentiality, medical ethics, physician attitudes
MeSH terms
Adult, Attitude of Health Personnel, Female, Health Surveys, Humans, Internship and Residency, Male, Middle Aged, Physician-Patient Relations, Physicians, United States, Cohort Studies, Internet, Young Adult, Social Networking

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.

Claims read by deepseek-v4.1-flash under definition version 3 (extract-v3) on 2026-10-11.

Classified by jev-1.13-20260917 (gold-guideline-v0.2) on 2026-10-11.

Cited sources are checked by gpt-6-sol.

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