The DOI matches its Crossref record; 19 of the 19 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; 1 of the 15 sources its claims cite were checked for support.
The Patient–Doctor Relationship and Online Social Networks: Results of a National Survey
Open accessAbstract
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…
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
31 Own result · 9 Own method · 7 No full text of the sources · 7 Own interpretation · 4 Not checked yet · 1 Supported · 1 Sources not found · 1 No basis given
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“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).”
§ The Patient-Doctor Relationship and Online Social Networks: Results of a National Survey > Abstract
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Also stated in: § Patient-doctor Interactions within Online Social Networks · plain
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“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%).”
§ The Patient-Doctor Relationship and Online Social Networks: Results of a National Survey > Usage Patterns
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“There were no statistically significant differences among the three groups for any of the responses.”
§ The Patient-Doctor Relationship and Online Social Networks: Results of a National Survey > Attitudes Toward OSNs
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“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).”
§ The Patient-Doctor Relationship and Online Social Networks: Results of a National Survey > Usage Patterns
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“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).”
§ The Patient-Doctor Relationship and Online Social Networks: Results of a National Survey > Patient-doctor Interactions within Online Social Networks
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“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%)”
- Also stated in: § Patient-doctor Interactions within Online Social Networks · plain
“Specifically, they were more likely to have visited the profile of a patient or patient's family member within an OSN than either MS or RP (MS 2.3%, RP 3.9%, PP 15. 5%; p<0.001 for MS vs. PP, p=0.014 for RP vs. PP).”
§ The Patient-Doctor Relationship and Online Social Networks: Results of a National Survey > Abstract
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Also stated in: § Patient-doctor Interactions within Online Social Networks · plain
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Most respondents reported that their personal OSN privacy status was completely private (MS 63.2%, RP 68.4%, PP 48.1%).”
§ The Patient-Doctor Relationship and Online Social Networks: Results of a National Survey > Usage Patterns
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Patient-doctor interactions take place within OSNs, and are more typically initiated by patients than by physicians or physicians-in-training.”
- Also stated in: § Patient-doctor Interactions within Online Social Networks · plain
“Overall, patients were more likely to request friendship with physicians within OSNs than vice versa (patient-initiated request 9.0%, physician-initiated request 1.2%; p<0.001).”
§ The Patient-Doctor Relationship and Online Social Networks: Results of a National Survey > Abstract
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Also stated in: § Patient-doctor Interactions within Online Social Networks · plain
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“No respondents from any group reported that they always accepted friend requests.”
§ The Patient-Doctor Relationship and Online Social Networks: Results of a National Survey > Patient-doctor Interactions within Online Social Networks
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Less than half of respondents reported that their personal OSN profile contained only information they would be willing to share with patients (MS 42.4%, RP 41.4%, PP 49.1%).”
§ The Patient-Doctor Relationship and Online Social Networks: Results of a National Survey > Usage Patterns
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Probably not a substantial claim. 8
- It may state two separate claims as one. 16
- The quote only partly states this claim. 1
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“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”
§ The Patient-Doctor Relationship and Online Social Networks: Results of a National Survey > DISCUSSION
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [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
The Description of Facebook Users reports that 362 of 813 medical students and residents (44.5%) had a Facebook account. The Methods identifies them as University of Florida medical students and residents employed by its associated Shands Hospital. Facebook is the online social network measured here. (LLM, conf=0.94)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Supported
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“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).”
§ The Patient-Doctor Relationship and Online Social Networks: Results of a National Survey > Abstract
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Also stated in: § Usage Patterns · plain
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“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.”
§ The Patient-Doctor Relationship and Online Social Networks: Results of a National Survey > Patient-doctor Interactions within Online Social Networks
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“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).”
§ The Patient-Doctor Relationship and Online Social Networks: Results of a National Survey > Usage Patterns
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Forty-six percent of MS, 50.0% of RP, and 50.9% of PP used more than one OSN.”
§ The Patient-Doctor Relationship and Online Social Networks: Results of a National Survey > Usage Patterns
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“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.”
§ The Patient-Doctor Relationship and Online Social Networks: Results of a National Survey > Patient-doctor Interactions within Online Social Networks
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Of those who had received friend requests, 58% of practicing physicians reported that they always replied”
§ The Patient-Doctor Relationship and Online Social Networks: Results of a National Survey > Patient-doctor Interactions within Online Social Networks
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one. The quote only partly states this claim.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“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.”
§ The Patient-Doctor Relationship and Online Social Networks: Results of a National Survey > DISCUSSION
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“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.”
§ The Patient-Doctor Relationship and Online Social Networks: Results of a National Survey > DISCUSSION
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“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.”
§ The Patient-Doctor Relationship and Online Social Networks: Results of a National Survey > Attitudes Toward OSNs
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“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”
§ The Patient-Doctor Relationship and Online Social Networks: Results of a National Survey > INTRODUCTION
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [7][8][9]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Also stated in: § DISCUSSION · plain
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The survey instrument was then piloted among ten resident and practicing physicians, and underwent iterative revision by members of the study team.”
§ The Patient-Doctor Relationship and Online Social Networks: Results of a National Survey > Survey
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This study was approved by the joint Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis/Clarian Health System institutional review board.”
§ The Patient-Doctor Relationship and Online Social Networks: Results of a National Survey > Study Sample
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“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.”
§ The Patient-Doctor Relationship and Online Social Networks: Results of a National Survey > Abstract
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Also stated in: § Respondent Characteristics · plain
In the paper
“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”
§ The Patient-Doctor Relationship and Online Social Networks: Results of a National Survey > DISCUSSION
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [17] Grover M. Defining the patient-physician relationship in the era of Facebook. Acad Med. 2010;85(8):1262. source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Most recently, Moubarak et al. reported that 73% of residents and fellows utilize Facebook.9”
§ The Patient-Doctor Relationship and Online Social Networks: Results of a National Survey > DISCUSSION
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [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
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“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.”
§ The Patient-Doctor Relationship and Online Social Networks: Results of a National Survey > DISCUSSION
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Additionally, both of these studies estimated usage rates by cross-referencing class lists with Facebook pages, leaving the possibility that usage rates were underestimated.”
§ The Patient-Doctor Relationship and Online Social Networks: Results of a National Survey > DISCUSSION
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“The structure of OSNs are such that they can dramatically blur the line between public and private spaces.25”
§ The Patient-Doctor Relationship and Online Social Networks: Results of a National Survey > DISCUSSION
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [25] Rosenblum D. What anyone can know - The privacy risks of social networking sites. Ieee Security & Privacy. 2007;5(3):40–49. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Although the sample size was low and limits the generalizability of findings, it provides novel information about the use of OSNs by medical professionals.”
§ The Patient-Doctor Relationship and Online Social Networks: Results of a National Survey > DISCUSSION
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Surveys returned as undeliverable were excluded from the analysis (59/1004 for MS, 87/1004 for RP, 30/1004 for PP).”
§ The Patient-Doctor Relationship and Online Social Networks: Results of a National Survey > Respondent Characteristics
plainn = 3,012- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“MacDonald et al. reported that 65% of recent medical school graduates in New Zealand reported using Facebook.18”
§ The Patient-Doctor Relationship and Online Social Networks: Results of a National Survey > DISCUSSION
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [18] MacDonald J, Sohn S, Ellis P. Privacy, professionalism and Facebook: a dilemma for young doctors. Med Educ. 2010;44(8):805–813. source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“However, both of the comparative studies were carried out in 2008, and usage of OSNs was likely less common at that time.”
§ The Patient-Doctor Relationship and Online Social Networks: Results of a National Survey > DISCUSSION
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
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.”
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 cited source doesn’t support the claim as written.
In the citing paper
“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]
Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“another study that showed that online patient-doctor interactions are more often than not started by the patients because healthcare workers do not feel at ease initiating interactions with patients through online platforms where privacy and security issues are far from ideal [48].”
From Future healthcare providers and professionalism on social media: a cross-sectional study (2022) · cites this paper as [48]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“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]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“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]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“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]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
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
“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]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“This is consistent with previous research demonstrating that in addition to the practical barriers to adoption of SM in the professional realm, a generation gap exists, with millennials using SM for contact and information far more frequently than members of generation X and baby boomers [150].”
From Dangers and Benefits of Social Media on E-Professionalism of Health Care Professionals: Scoping Review (2021) · cites this paper as [150]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Very few studies have examined how individuals use peer-generated health information or how HCPs perceive this content, and the research in this area is limited by small sample sizes, poor response rates, and a lack of detail.[20–22]”
From Perceived healthcare provider reactions to patient and caregiver use of online health communities (2014) · cites this paper as [20]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“This reflects similar usage patterns noted among US doctors [27].”
From How Doctors View and Use Social Media: A National Survey (2014) · cites this paper as [27]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“A 2010 national, random, stratified survey 19 found that 1.2% of medical students, 7.8% of residents, and 34.5% of practicing physicians received friend requests from a patient or a patient's family member.”
From e-Professionalism: A New Frontier in Medical Education (2013) · cites this paper as [19]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“It is important to note, however, that this study had only a 16% response rate.”
From e-Professionalism: A New Frontier in Medical Education (2013) · cites this paper as [19]
The check wasn’t confident either way, so it gives no verdict — never disputed.
In the citing paper
“Previous research suggests that patients frequently misjudge the quality of online health information, and many HCPs fear that social media sites spread misinformation and eclipse provider input into individuals’ health decisions.[20–21,33]”
From Perceived healthcare provider reactions to patient and caregiver use of online health communities (2014) · cites this paper as [20]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredIn the citing paper
“Recent studies estimate that more than 90% of medical students use online social media. 9”
From Beyond Good and Evil: Exploring Medical Trainee Use of Social Media (2012) · cites this paper as [9]
In the citing paper
“This answer contrasted the findings of two studies, one on medical students and physicians, and the other on pharmacists, which were both against interacting and giving medical advice to patients online [30, 48].”
From Future healthcare providers and professionalism on social media: a cross-sectional study (2022) · cites this paper as [48]
In the citing paper
“There is no single answer to this question, which is just beginning to be explored in the medical literature.28,36”
From Professionalism in a Digital Age: Opportunities and Considerations for Using Social Media in Health Care (2015) · cites this paper as [28]
In the citing paper
“Many health care providers have ethical concerns surrounding patient-provider interactions on social media.28”
From Professionalism in a Digital Age: Opportunities and Considerations for Using Social Media in Health Care (2015) · cites this paper as [28]
In the citing paper
“recent estimates of social media usage by doctors has risen dramatically from 41% in 20101 to 90% in 2011,2”
From Dangers and Opportunities for Social Media in Medicine (2013) · cites this paper as [1]
In the citing paper
“rates of use have been found to be above 90% for medical students.1,3”
From Dangers and Opportunities for Social Media in Medicine (2013) · cites this paper as [1]
In the citing paper
“Their “Know Your Numbers” campaign launched on YouTube in 2011 has presently received 72,000 views and helped inform about the importance of knowing one’s profile for blood pressure, lipids, and body mass index to prevent heart disease1.”
From Dangers and Opportunities for Social Media in Medicine (2013) · cites this paper as [1]
In the citing paper
“confirm previous reports that physicians in training use social media networks more commonly than faculty [13–16].”
From Who’s misbehaving? Perceptions of unprofessional social media use by medical students and faculty (2016) · cites this paper as [13]
In the citing paper
“Therefore, several studies have reported that physicians use social media frequently in their own private lives, however, they rarely use social media to communicate with their patients.6,15”
From Social media and Internet usage of orthopaedic surgeons (2017) · cites this paper as [15]
In the citing paper
“and some are hesitant about the acceptability of interacting with patients in this new venue with unclear boundaries [7].”
From Social media use by physicians: a qualitative study of the new frontier of medicine (2016) · cites this paper as [7]
In the citing paper
“In a survey of practicing physicians, approximately one third of physicians who use social networking reported receiving a friend request from a patient or a patient's family member; however only a small minority (5%) had ever extended the friend request themselves.22”
From Social Media and Clinical Care: Ethical, Professional, and Social Implications (2013) · cites this paper as [22]
In the citing paper
“This may have been because respondents assumed that interactions would be occurring on public sites and not secure patient-provider portals”
From Social Media and Clinical Care: Ethical, Professional, and Social Implications (2013) · cites this paper as [22]
In the citing paper
“In another study involving a sample that included medical students, resident physicians, and practicing physicians, the majority of respondents felt that it was equally unethical to interact with patients using online social networks for either social or patient-care reasons.”
From Social Media and Clinical Care: Ethical, Professional, and Social Implications (2013) · cites this paper as [22]
In the citing paper
“The existing research suggests that half of HCPs believe social media interferes with patient-provider communication and that many providers are concerned that OHCs spread misinformation or are forums for complaining about providers.[20–21]”
From Perceived healthcare provider reactions to patient and caregiver use of online health communities (2014) · cites this paper as [20]
In the citing paper
“Very few studies have examined how individuals use peer-generated health information or how HCPs perceive this content, and the research in this area is limited by small sample sizes, poor response rates, and a lack of detail.[20–22]”
From Perceived healthcare provider reactions to patient and caregiver use of online health communities (2014) · cites this paper as [20]
In the citing paper
“The existing research suggests that half of HCPs believe social media interferes with patient-provider communication and that many providers are concerned that OHCs spread misinformation or are forums for complaining about providers.[20–21]”
From Perceived healthcare provider reactions to patient and caregiver use of online health communities (2014) · cites this paper as [20]
In the citing paper
“Previous research suggests that patients frequently misjudge the quality of online health information, and many HCPs fear that social media sites spread misinformation and eclipse provider input into individuals’ health decisions.[20–21,33]”
From Perceived healthcare provider reactions to patient and caregiver use of online health communities (2014) · cites this paper as [20]
In the citing paper
“However, a study by Bosslet et al found that about 50% of physicians are pessimistic regarding potential improvements in physician–patient communication, seeing potential threats to patient confidentiality [36].”
In the citing paper
“Many health care providers worry about broadcasting misinformation and its negative influence on patients’ health decisions [54,58,59].”
From Improving the Theoretical Understanding Toward Patient-Driven Health Care Innovation Through Online Value Cocreation: Systematic Review (2020) · cites this paper as [58]
Citations
Cites
Physician response to surveys A review of the literature
Kellerman, S. (2001) · American Journal of Preventive Medicine · doi:10.1016/s0749-3797(00)00258-0 · Cited by 956
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
The 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
Online professionalism and the mirror of social media.
Greysen, S. R., Kind, T., & Chretien, K. C. (2010) · Journal of General Internal Medicine · doi:10.1007/s11606-010-1447-1 · Cited by 323
What Anyone Can Know: The Privacy Risks of Social Networking Sites
Rosenblum, D. (2007) · IEEE Security & Privacy · doi:10.1109/msp.2007.75 · Cited by 302
(2009) · Issue Lab (Candid) · Cited by 269
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
Privacy, professionalism and Facebook: a dilemma for young doctors
MacDonald, J., Sohn, S., & Ellis, P. (2010) · Medical Education · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2923.2010.03720.x · Cited by 245
(2011) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.2011.68 · Cited by 236
Research works printed but not linked: 3
- 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.
- Fletcher D. Facebook. Time. 2010;175(21):32–38.
- Martin BC. Don’t survey physicians! Chicago: American Medical Association; 1974.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Moorhead, S. A., Hazlett, D. E., Harrison, L., Carroll, J. K., Irwin, A., & Hoving, C. (2013) · Journal of Medical Internet Research · doi:10.2196/jmir.1933 · Cited by 2,517
Antheunis, M. L., Tates, K., & Nieboer, T. E. (2013) · Patient Education and Counseling · doi:10.1016/j.pec.2013.06.020 · Cited by 632
McGowan, B. S., Wasko, M. M., Vartabedian, B. S., Miller, R. S., Freiherr, D. D., & Abdolrasulnia, M. (2012) · Journal of Medical Internet Research · doi:10.2196/jmir.2138 · Cited by 381
Social 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
Dangers 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
Vukušić Rukavina, T., Viskić, J., Machala Poplašen, L., Relić, D., Marelić, M., Jokic, D., & Sedak, K. (2021) · Journal of Medical Internet Research · doi:10.2196/25770 · Cited by 199
“This is consistent with previous research demonstrating that in addition to the practical barriers to adoption of SM in the professional realm, a generation gap exists, with millennials using SM for contact and information far more frequently than members of generation X and baby boomers [150].”
InfluentialHow Doctors View and Use Social Media: A National Survey
Brown, J., Ryan, C., & Harris, A. (2014) · Journal of Medical Internet Research · doi:10.2196/jmir.3589 · Cited by 190
Practical guidance: the use of social media in oncology practice
Dizon, D. S., Graham, D., Thompson, M. A., Johnson, L. J., Johnston, C., Fisch, M. J., & Miller, R. (2012) · Journal of Oncology Practice · doi:10.1200/jop.2012.000610 · Cited by 163
Exploring the impact of workplace cyberbullying on trainee doctors
Farley, S., Coyne, I. J., Sprigg, C. A., Axtell, C. M., & Subramanian, G. (2015) · Medical Education · doi:10.1111/medu.12666 · Cited by 181
Perceived healthcare provider reactions to patient and caregiver use of online health communities
Rupert, D. J., Moultrie, R. R., Read, J. G., Amoozegar, J. B., Bornkessel, A. S., O’Donoghue, A. C., & Sullivan, H. W. (2014) · Patient Education and Counseling · doi:10.1016/j.pec.2014.05.015 · Cited by 149
Marziniak, M., Brichetto, G., Feys, P., Meyding‐Lamadé, U., Vernon, K., & Meuth, S. G. (2018) · JMIR Rehabilitation and Assistive Technologies · doi:10.2196/rehab.7805 · Cited by 136
Social media in undergraduate medical education: A systematic review
Guckian, J., Utukuri, M., Asif, A., Burton, O. E., Adeyoju, J., Oumeziane, A., Chu, T. S. M., & Rees, E. L. (2021) · Medical Education · doi:10.1111/medu.14567 · Cited by 148
Social media use by physicians: a qualitative study of the new frontier of medicine
Campbell, L., Evans, Y., Pumper, M., & Moreno, M. A. (2016) · BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making · doi:10.1186/s12911-016-0327-y · Cited by 135
Exploring the use of a facebook page in anatomy education
Jaffar, A. A. (2013) · Anatomical Sciences Education · doi:10.1002/ase.1404 · Cited by 135
Graffigna, G., Barello, S., Bonanomi, A. G., & Riva, G. (2017) · Patient Education and Counseling · doi:10.1016/j.pec.2017.05.033 · Cited by 103
RETRACTED: Prevalence of unprofessional social media content among young vascular surgeons
Hardouin, S., Cheng, T. W., Mitchell, E. L., Raulli, S. J., Jones, D. W., Siracuse, J. J., & Farber, A. (2020) · Journal of Vascular Surgery · doi:10.1016/j.jvs.2019.10.069 · Cited by 100
RetractedWang, J., Alotaibi, N. M., Ibrahim, G. M., Kulkarni, A. V., & Lozano, A. M. (2017) · World Neurosurgery · doi:10.1016/j.wneu.2017.04.157 · Cited by 97
Douglas, N. K., Scholz, M. M., Myers, M. A., Rae, S., Elmansouri, A., Hall, S., & Border, S. (2019) · Medical Science Educator · doi:10.1007/s40670-019-00767-5 · Cited by 106
e-Professionalism: A New Frontier in Medical Education
Kaczmarczyk, J. M., Chuang, A., Dugoff, L., Abbott, J. F., Cullimore, A. J., Dalrymple, J., Davis, K. R., Hueppchen, N. A., Katz, N. T., Nuthalapaty, F. S., et al. (2013) · Teaching and Learning in Medicine · doi:10.1080/10401334.2013.770741 · Cited by 94
Using Social Media to Improve Continuing Medical Education: A Survey of Course Participants
Wang, A. T., Sandhu, N. P., Wittich, C. M., Mandrekar, J. N., & Beckman, T. J. (2012) · Mayo Clinic Proceedings · doi:10.1016/j.mayocp.2012.07.024 · Cited by 97
Zalpuri, I., Liu, H. Y., Stubbe, D., Wrzosek, M., Sadhu, J., & Hilty, D. (2018) · Academic Psychiatry · doi:10.1007/s40596-018-0983-6 · Cited by 93
Gagnon, K., & Sabus, C. (2015) · Physical Therapy · doi:10.2522/ptj.20130227 · Cited by 90
Social Media and Health Care (Part II): Narrative Review of Social Media Use by Patients
Farsi, D., Martínez‐Menchaca, H., Ahmed, M., & Farsi, N. J. (2021) · Journal of Medical Internet Research · doi:10.2196/30379 · Cited by 105
Langenfeld, S. J., Cook, G., Sudbeck, C., Luers, T., & Schenarts, P. J. (2014) · Journal of Surgical Education · doi:10.1016/j.jsurg.2014.05.013 · Cited by 87
Kenny, P., & Johnson, I. G. (2016) · British Dental Journal · doi:10.1038/sj.bdj.2016.864 · Cited by 89
What is appropriate to post on social media? Ratings from students, faculty members and the public
Jain, A., Petty, E. M., Jaber, R. M., Tackett, S., Purkiss, J., Fitzgerald, J., & White, C. (2014) · Medical Education · doi:10.1111/medu.12282 · Cited by 84
Who’s misbehaving? Perceptions of unprofessional social media use by medical students and faculty
Kitsis, E. A., Milan, F. B., Cohen, H. W., Myers, D., Herron, P., McEvoy, M., Weingarten, J., & Grayson, M. S. (2016) · BMC Medical Education · doi:10.1186/s12909-016-0572-x · Cited by 82
Aboshady, O. A., Radwan, A., Eltaweel, A., Azzam, A. Y., Aboelnaga, A. A., Hashem, H. A., Darwish, S. Y., Salah, R., Kotb, O. N., Afifi, A. M., et al. (2015) · BMJ Open · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2014-006804 · Cited by 79
A qualitative analysis of orthodontic-related posts on Twitter
Henzell, M. R., Knight, A. M., Morgaine, K. C., et al. (2013) · The Angle Orthodontist · doi:10.2319/051013-355.1 · Cited by 80
Social media in medical and health care: opportunities and challenges
Lim, W. M. (2016) · Marketing Intelligence & Planning · doi:10.1108/mip-06-2015-0120 · Cited by 81
George, D. R., Dellasega, C. A., Whitehead, M. M., & Bordon, A. (2013) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2012.12.008 · Cited by 75
Social Media and Advancement of Women Physicians
Shillcutt, S. K., & Silver, J. K. (2018) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmms1801980 · Cited by 72
Commentary: The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly of Social Media
Bosslet, G. T. (2011) · Academic Emergency Medicine · doi:10.1111/j.1553-2712.2011.01197.x · Cited by 69
Self-citationKaňková, J., Binder, A., & Matthes, J. (2024) · BMC Public Health · doi:10.1186/s12889-024-21095-3 · Cited by 89
Twelve tips for developing and delivering a massive open online course in medical education
Pickering, J. D., Henningsohn, L., DeRuiter, M. C., de Jong, P. G. M., & Reinders, M. E. J. (2017) · Medical Teacher · doi:10.1080/0142159x.2017.1322189 · Cited by 58
Professional Use of Social Media Among Surgeons: Results of a Multi-Institutional Study
Wagner, J. P., Cochran, A. L., Jones, C., Gusani, N. J., Varghese, T. K., & Attai, D. J. (2018) · Journal of Surgical Education · doi:10.1016/j.jsurg.2017.09.008 · Cited by 56
Rezaei Aghdam, A., Watson, J., Cliff, C., & Miah, S. J. (2020) · Journal of Medical Internet Research · doi:10.2196/16324 · Cited by 57
“Many health care providers worry about broadcasting misinformation and its negative influence on patients’ health decisions [54,58,59].”
BackgroundRupert, D. J., Gard, J. C., Amoozegar, J. B., Moultrie, R., Taylor, O. M., O’Donoghue, A. C., & Sullivan, H. W. (2016) · Journal of Health Communication · doi:10.1080/10810730.2016.1237592 · Cited by 53
Mental Health Practitioners’ Use and Attitudes Regarding the Internet and Social Media
Deen, S. R., Withers, A., & Hellerstein, D. J. (2013) · Journal of Psychiatric Practice · doi:10.1097/01.pra.0000438184.74359.88 · Cited by 50
McEvenue, G., Copeland, A. E., Devon, K. M., & Semple, J. L. (2016) · Aesthetic Surgery Journal · doi:10.1093/asj/sjw069 · Cited by 57
Effectiveness of YouTube as a Source of Medical Information on Heart Transplantation
Chen, H., Hu, Z., Zheng, X., Yuan, Z., Xu, Z., Yuan, L., Pérez, V. D. J., Yuan, K., Orcholski, M. E., & Liao, X. (2013) · Interactive Journal of Medical Research · doi:10.2196/ijmr.2669 · Cited by 56
“Currently, 94% of medical students actively participate in social media applications, compared to 79% of residents and 42% of physicians [19,20].”
Backgroundden Eynde, J. V., Crauwels, A., Demaerel, P. G., Eycken, L. V., Bullens, D. M. A., Schrijvers, R., & Toelen, J. (2019) · JMIR Medical Education · doi:10.2196/12605 · Cited by 58
“Currently, 94% of medical students are actively participating in social media applications, compared with 79% of residents and 42% of physicians [4].”
Medical students’ use of Facebook for educational purposes
Ali, A. (2016) · Perspectives on Medical Education · doi:10.1007/s40037-016-0273-5 · Cited by 52
Social Media and Free Open Access Medical Education: The Future of Medical and Nursing Education?
Carroll, C. L., Bruno, K., & vonTschudi, M. (2016) · American Journal of Critical Care · doi:10.4037/ajcc2016622 · Cited by 52
Social Media Use in Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease
Guo, L., Reich, J. S., Groshek, J., et al. (2016) · Inflammatory Bowel Diseases · doi:10.1097/mib.0000000000000713 · Cited by 50
Analysis of emergency physicians' Twitter accounts
Lulić, I., & Ković, I. (2012) · Emergency Medicine Journal · doi:10.1136/emermed-2012-201132 · Cited by 48
Online professionalism: A synthetic review
Chretien, K. C., & Tuck, M. G. (2015) · International Review of Psychiatry · doi:10.3109/09540261.2015.1004305 · Cited by 49
The Impact of Social Media on Anesthesia Resident Recruitment
(2019) · Journal of Education in Perioperative Medicine · doi:10.46374/volxxi-issue1-renew · Cited by 48
Abuhashesh, M., Al-Dmour, H. H., Masa’deh, R. M. T., Salman, A. Z., Al-Dmour, R., Boguszewicz-Kreft, M., & AlAmaireh, Q. N. (2021) · Informatics · doi:10.3390/informatics8040080 · Cited by 56
Social Media Use for Orthopaedic Surgeons
Jildeh, T. R., Okoroha, K. R., Guthrie, S. T., & Parsons, T. W. (2019) · JBJS Reviews · doi:10.2106/jbjs.rvw.18.00085 · Cited by 45
Physicians, Social Media, and Conflict of Interest
DeCamp, M. W. (2012) · Journal of General Internal Medicine · doi:10.1007/s11606-012-2251-x · Cited by 49
Social Media Guidelines for Anatomists
Hennessy, C., Royer, D., Meyer, A. J., & Smith, C. F. (2020) · Anatomical Sciences Education · doi:10.1002/ase.1948 · Cited by 47
“Within medical education, large majorities of medical students have consistently reported using social media platforms for learning (Bosslet et al., 2011; George et al., 2013), with Facebook, YouTube, and Twitter being reported as the most commonly used by medical students (El Bialy and Jalali,…”
BackgroundE-Professionalism as a Professional Identity in the Digital Era of Medical Education
Lonappan, J., Aithal, P. S., & Jacob, M. (2023) · International Journal of Health Sciences and Pharmacy · doi:10.47992/ijhsp.2581.6411.0107 · Cited by 45
Contemporary use of social media by consultant colorectal surgeons
McDonald, J. J., Bisset, C. N., Coleman, M., Speake, D., & Brady, R. R. W. (2014) · Colorectal Disease · doi:10.1111/codi.12780 · Cited by 44
Beyond Good and Evil: Exploring Medical Trainee Use of Social Media
George, D. R., & Green, M. J. (2012) · Teaching and Learning in Medicine · doi:10.1080/10401334.2012.664972 · Cited by 43
Social media presence of otolaryngology journals: The past, present, and future
Wong, K., Piraquive, J., & Levi, J. R. (2017) · The Laryngoscope · doi:10.1002/lary.26727 · Cited by 41
Social Media Utilization at an Academic Radiology Practice
Koontz, N. A., Kamer, A. P., Dodson, S. C., Capps, A. E., Tomblinson, C. M., Brown, B. P., Frank, M. S., & Heitkamp, D. E. (2017) · Academic Radiology · doi:10.1016/j.acra.2017.08.012 · Cited by 40
Lie (2013) · doi:10.1097/acm.0b013e31827bf5fc · Cited by 41
Social Media and Academic Impact: Do Early Tweets Correlate with Future Citations?
Vaghjiani, N. G., Lal, V., Vahidi, N. A., Ebadi, A., Carli, M. M., Sima, A. P., & Coelho, D. H. (2021) · Ear Nose & Throat Journal · doi:10.1177/01455613211042113 · Cited by 41
Preparing medical students for the e-patient
Masters, K. (2017) · Medical Teacher · doi:10.1080/0142159x.2017.1324142 · Cited by 37
Social Media Tips to Enhance Medical Education
Shah, V., & Kotsenas, A. L. (2017) · Academic Radiology · doi:10.1016/j.acra.2016.12.023 · Cited by 41
Social media and Internet usage of orthopaedic surgeons
Duymuş, T. M., Karadeniz, H., Şükür, E., Atiç, R., Zehir, S., & Azboy, İ. (2017) · Journal of Clinical Orthopaedics and Trauma · doi:10.1016/j.jcot.2016.10.007 · Cited by 40
The Use of Twitter by Plastic Surgery Journals
Asyyed, Z., McGuire, C., Samargandi, O. A., Al‐Youha, S., & Williams, J. G. (2019) · Plastic & Reconstructive Surgery · doi:10.1097/prs.0000000000005535 · Cited by 39
Framework for efficient utilisation of social media in Pakistan's healthcare sector
Nisar, S., & Shafiq, M. (2018) · Technology in Society · doi:10.1016/j.techsoc.2018.09.003 · Cited by 45
Do pharmacists use social media for patient care?
Benetoli, A., Chen, T. F., Schaefer, M., Chaar, B., & Aslani, P. (2017) · International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy · doi:10.1007/s11096-017-0444-4 · Cited by 37
The Utility of Social Media in Providing Information on Zika Virus
Chandrasekaran, N., Gressick, K., Singh, V. K., Kwal, J. M., Cap, N., Koru‐Sengul, T., & Curry, C. L. (2017) · Cureus · doi:10.7759/cureus.1792 · Cited by 36
Moick, M., & Terlutter, R. (2012) · Medicine 2.0 · doi:10.2196/med20.1996 · Cited by 37
The use of social media among Saudi residents for medicines related information
Al-Haddad, M. (2018) · Saudi Pharmaceutical Journal · doi:10.1016/j.jsps.2018.05.021 · Cited by 36
Jones, E., Sinclair, J., Holt, R. I. G., & Barnard, K. D. (2013) · Diabetes Technology & Therapeutics · doi:10.1089/dia.2012.0327 · Cited by 34
Bornkessel, A. S., Furberg, R., & Lefebvre, R. C. (2014) · Current Cardiology Reports · doi:10.1007/s11886-014-0504-5 · Cited by 34
Marelić, M., Viskić, J., Poplašen, L. M., Relić, D., Jokić, D., & Rukavina, T. V. (2021) · BMC Medical Education · doi:10.1186/s12909-021-02879-2 · Cited by 31
Rich, A., Aly, A., Cecchinato, M. E., Lascău, L., Baker, M., Viney, R., & Cox, A. L. (2020) · BMC Medical Education · doi:10.1186/s12909-020-02160-y · Cited by 39
“, [42]) and inability to follow up problematic due to potential selection bias and loss in sample size.”
BackgroundDaniel, F. E., Jabak, S. J., Sasso, R., Chamoun, Y., & Tamim, H. (2018) · JMIR Medical Informatics · doi:10.2196/medinform.8895 · Cited by 35
Langenfeld, S. J., Sudbeck, C., Luers, T., Adamson, P., Cook, G., & Schenarts, P. J. (2015) · Journal of Surgical Education · doi:10.1016/j.jsurg.2015.07.007 · Cited by 33
Fueling Hope: Stem Cells in Social Media
Robillard, J. M., Cabral, E., Hennessey, C. A., Kwon, B. K., & Illes, J. (2015) · Stem Cell Reviews and Reports · doi:10.1007/s12015-015-9591-y · Cited by 33
How we used two social media tools to enhance aspects of active learning during lectures
George, D. R., Dreibelbis, T. D., & Aumiller, B. B. (2013) · Medical Teacher · doi:10.3109/0142159x.2013.818631 · Cited by 35
Global Trends in Plastic Surgery on Social Media: Analysis of 2 Million Posts
Braun, S. E., O’Connor, M. K., Hornick, M. M., Cullom, M. E., & Butterworth, J. A. (2021) · Aesthetic Surgery Journal · doi:10.1093/asj/sjab185 · Cited by 35
Criteria to Measure Social Media Value in Health Care Settings: Narrative Literature Review
Ukoha, C., & Stranieri, A. (2019) · Journal of Medical Internet Research · doi:10.2196/14684 · Cited by 35
“Research to date on the value of social media in health care settings has largely focused on the use and value of the application to health care providers [1,13-15] and patients [16-21].”
Professional conduct among Registered Nurses in the use of online social networking sites
Levati, S. (2014) · Journal of Advanced Nursing · doi:10.1111/jan.12377 · Cited by 32
Zhou, J. (2018) · Asia Pacific Journal of Public Health · doi:10.1177/1010539518754390 · Cited by 29
Social Media and Tomorrow's Medical Students—How Do They Fit?
Foley, N. M., Maher, B., & Corrigan, M. A. (2013) · Journal of surgical education · doi:10.1016/j.jsurg.2013.10.008 · Cited by 33
Analysis of motivations that lead women to participate (or not) in a newborn cohort study
Brumatti, L. V., Montico, M., Russian, S., Tognin, V., Bin, M., Barbone, F., Volpi, P., & Ronfani, L. (2013) · BMC Pediatrics · doi:10.1186/1471-2431-13-53 · Cited by 31
The Impact of Physician Social Media Behavior on Patient Trust
Fatollahi, J. J., Colbert, J. A., Agarwal, P., Lee, J. L.-Y., Lehmann, E. Y., Yuan, N., Lehmann, L. S., & Chretien, K. C. (2019) · AJOB Empirical Bioethics · doi:10.1080/23294515.2019.1678533 · Cited by 30
“…on online professionalism, including those of medical educators and administrators, practicing physicians, trainees, and, to a much lesser extent, the general public (Bosslet et al. 2011; Chretien et al. 2010; Chretien et al. 2011; Jain et al. 2014; Kitsis et al. 2016; Langenfeld et al. 2014).”
BackgroundUnderstanding health food messages on Twitter for health literacy promotion
Zhou, J., Liu, F., & Zhou, H. (2018) · Perspectives in Public Health · doi:10.1177/1757913918760359 · Cited by 30
Brisson, G. E., Fisher, M. J., LaBelle, M. W., & Kozmic, S. E. (2015) · Teaching and Learning in Medicine · doi:10.1080/10401334.2015.1011648 · Cited by 29
Cawcutt, K. A., Erdahl, L. M., Englander, M. J., Radford, D. M., Oxentenko, A. S., Girgis, L., Migliore, L. L., Poorman, J. A., & Silver, J. K. (2019) · Journal of Women s Health · doi:10.1089/jwh.2018.7515 · Cited by 29
“Previous reports have shown that most physicians, 39–41 like the majority (69”
Online Digital Media: The Uptake of YouTube-based Digital Clinical Education (DCE)
Rangarajan, K., Begg, K., & Somani, B. K. (2019) · American Journal of Distance Education · doi:10.1080/08923647.2019.1582308 · Cited by 30
“In this wave of technology-driven learning, ‘ Generation C ’ or ‘ Generation Connected ’ possesses an inclination to use socially driven learning methods with one study reporting that up to 94% of medical students use social media applications (Bosslet, Torke, Hickman, Terry, & Helft, 2011).”
BackgroundOmaggio, N. F., Baker, M. J., & Conway, L. J. (2018) · Journal of Genetic Counseling · doi:10.1007/s10897-017-0206-4 · Cited by 30
Information technology and its role in anaesthesia training and continuing medical education
Chu, L. F., Erlendson, M. J., Sun, J. S., Clemenson, A., Martin, P., & Eng, R. L. (2012) · Best practice & research. Clinical anaesthesiology · doi:10.1016/j.bpa.2012.02.002 · Cited by 29
Li, P., Wang, Y., & Chen, J. (2020) · Journal of Medical Internet Research · doi:10.2196/18569 · Cited by 28
“Background Online health communities have recently emerged as an important channel for seeking medical information and physicians’ help [1], improving the physician-patient relationship [2], and raising the level of public health [3].”
BackgroundSocial Media and the Orthopaedic Surgeon: a Mixed Methods Study
(2019) · Acta Informatica Medica · doi:10.5455/aim.2019.27.23-28 · Cited by 25
Kantor, D., Bright, J. R., & Burtchell, J. (2017) · Neurology and Therapy · doi:10.1007/s40120-017-0088-2 · Cited by 27
Carroll, C. L., Bruno, K., & Ramachandran, P. (2017) · CHEST Journal · doi:10.1016/j.chest.2017.03.003 · Cited by 26
Online social support networks
Mehta, N., & Atreja, A. (2015) · International Review of Psychiatry · doi:10.3109/09540261.2015.1015504 · Cited by 28
Toward a typology of health 2.0 collaboration platforms and websites
Kordzadeh, N., & Warren, J. (2013) · Health and Technology · doi:10.1007/s12553-013-0043-x · Cited by 29
Conti, A., Magnani, M., Zoli, M., Kockro, R. A., Tuleasca, C., Peschillo, S., Umana, G. E., Seow, W. T., Jallo, G. I., Garg, K., et al. (2023) · Brain and Spine · doi:10.1016/j.bas.2023.101728 · Cited by 27
“Indeed, almost all medical students and residents use social media, implying that in a few years, most practicing physicians will have had significant exposure (Bosslet et al., 2011).”
BackgroundViskić, J., Jokić, D., Marelić, M., Machala Poplašen, L., Relić, D., Sedak, K., & Vukušić Rukavina, T. (2021) · Croatian Medical Journal · doi:10.3325/cmj.2021.62.569 · Cited by 24
Use of Social Media in Health Care—Opportunities, Challenges, and Ethical Considerations
Busl, K. M., Rubin, M. A., Tolchin, B. D., Larriviere, D., Epstein, L. G., Kirschen, M. P., & Taylor, L. P. (2021) · Neurology · doi:10.1212/wnl.0000000000012557 · Cited by 34
“” Social media “friendships” with patients are not prohibited, although a majority of physicians view online interactions with patients as ethically problematic due to confidentiality and pessimism about the actual quality of communication.(51) If they do occur, clinicians are responsible for closely monitoring such r…”
BackgroundMeade, M. J., & Dreyer, C. W. (2020) · Journal of the World Federation of Orthodontists · doi:10.1016/j.ejwf.2020.11.002 · Cited by 27
Future healthcare providers and professionalism on social media: a cross-sectional study
Soubra, R., Hasan, I., Ftouni, L., Saab, A., & Shaarani, I. (2022) · BMC Medical Ethics · doi:10.1186/s12910-022-00742-7 · Cited by 26
“This answer contrasted the findings of two studies, one on medical students and physicians, and the other on pharmacists, which were both against interacting and giving medical advice to patients online [30, 48].”
Result
Metadata
- 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.
- Venue
- Journal of General Internal Medicine
- Published
- 2011-06-25
- Volume
- 26
- Issue
- 10
- Pages
- 1168-1174
- ISSN
- 0884-8734 (ISSN-L)
- 1525-1497
- 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
- bronze
- doi.org
- 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.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-11, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-11 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
Cited sources are checked with a language model’s help (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
