CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 235Health Literacy and Information AccessibilitySocial Media and PoliticsSocial Media in Health Education

‘To me, it's my life’: medical communication, trust, and activism in cyberspace

Radin, Patricia·2006·Social Science & Medicine
DOI 10.1016/j.socscimed.2005.06.022
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

This paper studies the conversations and activities of an online support group for breast cancer sufferers and survivors and their supporters. Using communications medium theory and social capital theory, it examines the mundane and profound exchanges, the poignant self-disclosures, the creative expressions of solidarity, and the minor but not-insignificant political actions of people--initially strangers--who come together as a 'virtuous circle,' not only to assist with medical issues but also to meet emotional and even material needs. Sponsored by the Canadian nonprofit organization Breast Cancer Action Nova Scotia (BCANS), this virtual community has logged over a half million messages since 1996. Not every BCANS participant is an activist--many are just trying to grapple with their disease--but some find ways to shatter the professional "information monopoly," and to press for healthcare improvements. The study illustrates the scope, passion, and complexity of peer-to-peer medical communication in a virtual environment that promotes "thick trust". BCANS participants discuss with candor, warmth and even humor such painful topics as death and dying and the crises in intimate relationships brought about by a terminal illness. The sharing of confidences and fears enables participants to pool their 'collective intelligence' about many things, from how to cope with swelling, to how to think about end-of-life issues, to how to improve social policy.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.socscimed.2005.06.022

Cites

49 of 49 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • Technology does not merely enable individuals to identify on the basis of their biological/pathological characteristics but through the use of technology a new set of rights and responsibilities opens up for health citizens.

    “Technology does not merely enable individuals to identify on the basis of their biological/pathological characteristics (Petersen et al., 2018) but through the use of technology a new set or rights and responsibilities opens up for health citizens (Barrett et al., 2016;Radin, 2006;Vicari and Cappai, 2016).”

    From The Cultivation of Digital Health Citizenship (2021) · cites this paper as Radin, 2006

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Radin, P.
Corresponding author
Radin, Patricia
Venue
Social Science & Medicine
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2006-02
Volume
62
Issue
3
Pages
591-601
ISSN
0277-9536 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.socscimed.2005.06.022
OpenAlex
W2065971522
Cited by
235
References
49
Citations by year
2025: 9 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 20 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 13 · 2016: 9 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 18 · 2013: 11 · 2012: 16
FWCI
25.27
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/ (tdm)
Locations
  • Social Science & Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Literacy and Information Accessibility
  • Social Sciences › Communication › Social Media and Politics
  • Social Sciences › Health › Social Media in Health Education
Keywords
breast cancer, online support groups, online communities, activism, social capital, solidarity, self-disclosure, collective intelligence, end-of-life issues
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Breast Neoplasms, Cooperative Behavior, Female, Humans, Nova Scotia, Patient Advocacy, Patient Participation, Self Disclosure, Self-Help Groups, Social Change, Sociology, Medical, Voluntary Health Agencies, Models, Organizational, Internet, Trust

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review