Cited by 40Social Media in Health EducationEducational Technology in LearningImpact of Technology on Adolescents

First year nursing students’ experiences of social media during the transition to university: a focus group study

Open access
Ferguson, Caleb, DiGiacomo, Michelle, Saliba, Bernard, Green, Janet, Moorley, Calvin, Wyllie, Aileen, Jackson, Debra·2016·Contemporary Nurse

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Social media platforms are useful for creating communities, which can then be utilised as a mean for supportive, professional and social learning. OBJECTIVE: To explore first year nursing student experiences with social media in supporting student transition and engagement into higher education. DESIGN: Qualitative focus groups. METHODS: Ten 1st year Bachelor of Nursing students were included in three face-to-face focus groups. Data were analysed using qualitative thematic content analysis. RESULTS: Three key themes emerged that illustrates the experiences of transition and engagement of first year student nurses using social media at university. (1) Facilitating familiarity and collaboration at a safe distance, (2) promoting independent learning by facilitating access to resources, and (3) mitigating hazards of social media. CONCLUSION: This study has demonstrated the importance of social media in supporting informal peer-peer learning and support, augmenting online and offline relationships, and building professional identity as a nurse.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/10376178.2016.1205458

Cites

14 of 14 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Some studies emphasize social media benefits of peer-to-peer advising or learning, provision of emotional support, and identifying approaches through which physicians establish interpersonal trust on social media.

    “Some studies emphasize SM benefits of peer-to-peer advising or learning, provision of emotional support, and identifying approaches through which physicians establish interpersonal trust on SM [36,45,92].”

    From Dangers and Benefits of Social Media on E-Professionalism of Health Care Professionals: Scoping Review (2021) · cites this paper as [45]

    The Conclusion reports that Facebook supported informal peer-to-peer learning and support among first-year nursing students. The Background also describes supportive communities for student nurses. The paper does not address how physicians establish interpersonal trust on social media, so it supports only part of the cited sentence. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Professional networking and collaborations on social media enable development and building of professional identities for health care professions.

    “Professional networking and collaborations on SM enable the development and building of professional identities for health care professions [34,38,39,45,67,73,104].”

    From Dangers and Benefits of Social Media on E-Professionalism of Health Care Professionals: Scoping Review (2021) · cites this paper as [45]

    The Results (page unavailable) describe nursing students collaborating through Facebook, and the Conclusion (page unavailable) says Facebook helped build professional identity as a nurse. The study concerns first-year nursing students, however, so it does not establish the claim across health care professions generally. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Several studies demonstrated students' use of social media for acquiring knowledge, gaining access to information from experts they otherwise could not connect with, or creating communities for supportive, professional, and social learning.

    “Several studies have demonstrated students’ use of SM for acquiring knowledge, to gain access to information from experts with whom they otherwise would not be able to connect with, or for creating communities that can then be used as means for supportive, professional, and social learning [44,45,58,66].”

    From Dangers and Benefits of Social Media on E-Professionalism of Health Care Professionals: Scoping Review (2021) · cites this paper as [45]

    The Results describe nursing students using Facebook groups to exchange information about coursework and support one another; the Conclusion identifies informal peer learning and professional identity-building. The study does not show these students gaining access to otherwise unreachable experts. Its Discussion mentions meeting researchers, but attributes that finding to a different study. (LLM, conf=0.85)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Students are concerned about the extent of representation of their character on social media; they edit profiles before interviews or career fairs or intend to review or modify their profiles when they become qualified.

    “Students are concerned about the extent of representation of the students’ character on SM; they edit profiles before interviews or career fairs [57,70] or intend to review or modify their profiles when they become qualified [45,51].”

    From Dangers and Benefits of Social Media on E-Professionalism of Health Care Professionals: Scoping Review (2021) · cites this paper as [45]

    The Results report that students were cautious about Facebook content because employers could see it, and the Conclusion says they worried about future employability. Neither passage says students intended to review or modify their profiles when they became qualified; the separate claim about editing profiles before interviews or career fairs is attached to other citations. (LLM, conf=0.83)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Loosening accountability is a danger to e-professionalism from two points of view: eroding public trust by providing poor quality of information on social media and damaging the professional image.

    “According to some studies in this review, loosening accountability can be seen as a danger to e-professionalism from two points of view: eroding public trust by providing poor quality of information on SM [39,106,117] and damaging to the professional image [43, 45, 51, 56, 57, 59, 64, 66, 68, 70, 73, 102, 106, 112].”

    From Dangers and Benefits of Social Media on E-Professionalism of Health Care Professionals: Scoping Review (2021) · cites this paper as [45]

    The Results and Conclusion describe students’ concern that inappropriate Facebook posts could affect how employers see them and harm their employment prospects, supporting the professional-image concern. The Discussion mentions accuracy concerns, but does not say that poor-quality information on social media erodes public trust or frame these risks as a loosening of accountability. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Cleary, M., Ferguson, C., Jackson, D., & Watson, R. (2013). Social media and the new e-professionalism. Contemporary Nurse, 45(2), 152–154.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Ferguson, C., DiGiacomo, M., Saliba, B., Green, J., Moorley, C., Wyllie, A., & Jackson, D.
Affiliations
  • University of Technology Sydney (AU)
  • London South Bank University (GB)
  • Oxford Brookes University (GB)
Corresponding author
Ferguson, Caleb
Venue
Contemporary Nurse
Published
2016-07-11
Volume
52
Issue
5
Pages
625-635
ISSN
  • 1037-6178 (ISSN-L)
  • 1839-3535
OpenAlex
W2469497264
Cited by
40
References
14
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 5
FWCI
7.48
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by-nc
Locations
  • Contemporary Nurse (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Research Open (London South Bank University) (acceptedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • Research Open (London South Bank University) (acceptedVersion)
  • EPubDev Repository (submittedVersion)
  • OPUS - Open Publications of UTS Scholars (University of Technology Sydney) (submittedVersion)
  • RUNE (Research UNE) (submittedVersion)
  • Radar (Oxford Brookes University) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
Funders
UTS Widening Participation Strategy (WPS) (UTS Widening Participation Strategy (WPS) ‘First)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Health › Social Media in Health Education
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Educational Technology in Learning
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Impact of Technology on Adolescents
Keywords
social media, first-year nursing students, transition to college, student engagement, peer learning, professional identity, online learning, nursing education
MeSH terms
Adult, Education, Nursing, Baccalaureate, Female, Humans, Longitudinal Studies, Male, New South Wales, Peer Group, Students, Nursing, Nursing Education Research, Focus Groups, Qualitative Research, Young Adult, Social Media

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