Patient-targeted Googling and social media: a cross-sectional study of senior medical students
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND: Social media and Internet technologies present several emerging and ill-explored issues for a modern healthcare workforce. One issue is patient-targeted Googling (PTG), which involves a healthcare professional using a social networking site (SNS) or publicly available search engine to find patient information online. The study's aim was to address a deficit in data and knowledge regarding PTG, and to investigate medical student use of SNSs due to a close association with PTG. METHOD: The authors surveyed final year medical students at the Otago Medical School, University of Otago in January 2016. A subset completed focus groups that were analysed using thematic analysis to identify key themes relating to students' attitudes towards PTG, and reasons why they might engage in PTG. RESULTS: Fifty-four students completed the survey (response rate = 65.1%), which showed that PTG was uncommon (n = 9, 16.7%). Attitudes were varied and context dependent. Most participants saw problems with PTG and favoured more explicit guidance on the issue (n = 29, 53.7%). SNS usage was high (n = 51, 94.4%); participants were concerned by the content of their SNS profiles and who they were connecting with online. Participants showing high SNS use were 1.83 times more likely to have conducted PTG than lower use groups. CONCLUSIONS: The diverse attitudes uncovered in this study indicated that teaching or guidelines could be useful to healthcare professionals considering PTG. Though ethically problematic, PTG may be important to patient care and safety. The decision to conduct PTG should be made with consideration of ethical principles and the intended use of the information.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Potential damage to professional image has been depicted by students as concerns about repercussions of their posts on career development or future employment, since employers are checking social media profiles of candidates.
“Potential damage to the professional image has been depicted by students as concerns about repercussions of their posts on career development or future employment, since employers are checking SM profiles of candidates [43, 45, 51, 56, 57, 59, 66, 68, 70].”
From Dangers and Benefits of Social Media on E-Professionalism of Health Care Professionals: Scoping Review (2021) · cites this paper as [70]
The Results (Social networking site usage; page not provided) report that students were concerned about their profiles and that 51.8% had edited them because of potential career effects. The passage does not say that employers check candidates’ social media profiles or link that practice to the students’ concerns. (LLM, conf=0.85)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredStudents 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 [70]
The Results, under “Social networking site usage” (page not provided), report concerns about profile content and say that 28 students (51.8%) had edited their profiles because of potential career effects. They do not say the edits occurred before interviews or career fairs, or that students intended to review or modify profiles once qualified. (LLM, conf=0.86)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredNumerous studies document blurred boundaries between patients and health care professionals, and between students and faculty.
“Numerous studies document blurred boundaries between patient and HCPs, and between students and faculty [40, 43, 47, 59, 64, 65, 68, 70, 73, 75, 78, 82, 85, 98, 100, 105, 107, 114, 117].”
From Dangers and Benefits of Social Media on E-Professionalism of Health Care Professionals: Scoping Review (2021) · cites this paper as [70]
The Background (page unavailable) explicitly says social media and the Internet blur professional boundaries in the doctor–patient relationship. The Results, ‘Social networking site usage’ (page unavailable), report students’ views on online connections with patients and superiors, but do not identify those superiors as faculty or specifically document blurred student–faculty boundaries. (LLM, conf=0.82)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredStudents depict potential damage to professional image as a concern about repercussions of their posts on career development or future employment because employers check social media profiles of candidates.
“Potential damage to professional image has been depicted by students as a concern about repercussions of their posts, on career development, or on future employment since employers are checking SM profiles of candidates [43, 45, 51, 56, 57, 59, 66, 68, 70].”
From Dangers and Benefits of Social Media on E-Professionalism of Health Care Professionals: Scoping Review (2021) · cites this paper as [70]
The Results section, “Social networking site usage” (page unavailable), reports that 51.8% of senior medical students edited their profiles because of potential career effects, supporting concern about repercussions of posts. It does not report that employers check candidates’ profiles or link the students’ concern specifically to future employment. (LLM, conf=0.86)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredA wide range of opinions exists on the acceptability of online interaction with patients, ranging from one-third of medical students in Brazil finding it unacceptable to 92% of senior medical students in New Zealand.
“Although online interaction with a patient is generally not acceptable nor endorsed, a wide range of opinions have been observed concerning this issue, ranging from one-third for medical students in Brazil [59] that find this unacceptable to 92% for senior medical students in New Zealand [70].”
From Dangers and Benefits of Social Media on E-Professionalism of Health Care Professionals: Scoping Review (2021) · cites this paper as [70]
The Results (Social networking site usage) report that 50 of 54 senior New Zealand medical students (92.6%) considered accepting a patient’s online friend request inappropriate. This supports the approximate percentage, but the finding concerns that specific interaction, not online interaction with patients generally. The Brazil figure is attributed to a different citation. (LLM, conf=0.82)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Boundaries are blurred between patients and health care professionals, and between students and faculty.
“Boundaries are blurred between patients and HCPs, and between students and faculty [40, 43, 47, 59, 64, 65, 68, 70, 73, 75, 78, 82, 85, 98, 100, 105, 107, 114, 117].”
From Dangers and Benefits of Social Media on E-Professionalism of Health Care Professionals: Scoping Review (2021) · cites this paper as [70]
The Background (page unavailable) says social networking sites and the Internet blur professional boundaries in the doctor–patient relationship, supporting the patient–HCP part of the claim. The Results, under “Social networking site usage” (page unavailable), report students’ views on friend requests from superiors, but do not establish that boundaries between students and faculty are blurred. (LLM, conf=0.84)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredA wide range of opinions have been observed concerning friending a patient, ranging from one-third of medical students in Brazil finding this unacceptable to 92% of senior medical students in New Zealand.
““Friending a patient” is generally not acceptable nor endorsed; a wide range of opinions have been observed concerning this issue, ranging from one-third for medical students in Brazil [59] that find this unacceptable to 92% for senior medical students in New Zealand [70].”
From Dangers and Benefits of Social Media on E-Professionalism of Health Care Professionals: Scoping Review (2021) · cites this paper as [70]
In Chester et al's study, 16.7% of respondents had conducted patient-targeted Googling.
“Results of this study show that 16.7% of respondents had conducted patient-targeted Googling.”
From Dangers and Benefits of Social Media on E-Professionalism of Health Care Professionals: Scoping Review (2021) · cites this paper as [70]
There is some evidence of an association between social networking site use and likelihood of patient-targeted Googling, with high social networking site users more likely to conduct patient-targeted Googling, but the observations were made on a small number of observations.
“There is some evidence of an association between SNS use and likelihood of patient-targeted Googling, with high SNS users more likely to conduct patient-targeted Googling, but as the authors acknowledge, their observations were made on a small number of observations.”
From Dangers and Benefits of Social Media on E-Professionalism of Health Care Professionals: Scoping Review (2021) · cites this paper as [70]
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
Using thematic analysis in psychology
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006) · Qualitative Research in Psychology · doi:10.1191/1478088706qp063oa · Cited by 194,414 · see citing works
Harris, P. A., Taylor, R., Thielke, R., Payne, J., Gonzalez, N., & Conde, J. G. (2009) · Journal of Biomedical Informatics · doi:10.1016/j.jbi.2008.08.010 · Cited by 51,384 · see citing works
The Patient–Doctor Relationship and Online Social Networks: Results of a National Survey
Bosslet, G. T., Torke, A. M., Hickman, S. E., Terry, C. L., & Helft, P. R. (2011) · Journal of General Internal Medicine · doi:10.1007/s11606-011-1761-2 · Cited by 306 · see citing works
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 · see citing works
How 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 · see citing works
Patient-Targeted Googling: The Ethics of Searching Online for Patient Information
Clinton, B. K., Silverman, B. C., & Brendel, D. H. (2010) · Harvard Review of Psychiatry · doi:10.3109/10673221003683861 · Cited by 121 · see citing works
Burgess, D. J., Burke, S. E., Cunningham, B. A., Dovidio, J. F., Hardeman, R. R., Hou, Y., Nelson, D. B., Perry, S., Phelan, S. M., Yeazel, M. W., et al. (2016) · BMC Medical Education · doi:10.1186/s12909-016-0769-z · Cited by 117 · see citing works
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 · see citing works
Professionalism and the Internet in Psychiatry: What to Teach and How to Teach It
DeJong, S. M., Benjamin, S., Anzia, J. M., John, N. J., BOLAND, R. J., Lomax, J. W., & Rostain, A. L. (2012) · Academic Psychiatry · doi:10.1176/appi.ap.11050097 · Cited by 50 · see citing works
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 · see citing works
Baker, M. J., George, D. R., & Kauffman, G. L. (2014) · Journal of General Internal Medicine · doi:10.1007/s11606-014-3030-7 · Cited by 26 · see citing works
Social networking and professional ethics: Client searches, informed consent, and disclosure.
Harris, S., & Kurpius, S. E. R. (2014) · Professional Psychology Research and Practice · doi:10.1037/a0033478 · Cited by 25 · see citing works
Ben-Yakov, M., Kayssi, A., Bernardo, J. D., Hicks, C. M., & Devon, K. (2015) · Western Journal of Emergency Medicine · doi:10.5811/westjem.2015.1.24258 · Cited by 22 · see citing works
Volpe, R. L., Blackall, G. F., Green, M. J., et al. (2013) · The Hastings Center Report · doi:10.1002/hast.206 · Cited by 19 · see citing works
The law of torts in New Zealand
Todd, S., & Burrows, J. F. (1991) · Law Book Co. · Cited by 14 · see citing works
The changing face(book) of psychiatry: can we justify ‘following’ patients' social media activity?
Cox-George, C. (2015) · BJPsych Bulletin · doi:10.1192/pb.bp.114.049130 · Cited by 10 · see citing works
The Internet in New Zealand 2013
Gibson, A., Miller, M., Smith, P. K., et al. (2013) · Tuwhera (Auckland University of Technology) · Cited by 9 · see citing works
Implementing Performance Pay in Health Care: Do We Know Enough to Do It Well?
Francis, J., & Clancy, C. M. (2016) · Journal of General Internal Medicine · doi:10.1007/s11606-015-3574-1 · Cited by 4 · see citing works
Case study. Googling a patient. Commentary.
George, D., Baker, M. W., & Kauffman, G. L. (2013) · PubMed · Cited by 1 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
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 · see citing works
“Numerous studies document blurred boundaries between patient and HCPs, and between students and faculty [40, 43, 47, 59, 64, 65, 68, 70, 73, 75, 78, 82, 85, 98, 100, 105, 107, 114, 117].”
InfluentialKarveleas, I., Kyriakouli, A., Koukou, M., Koufatzidou, M., Kalogirou, E., & Tosios, K. I. (2021) · European Journal of Dental Education · doi:10.1111/eje.12585 · Cited by 24 · see citing works
- Authors
- Chester, A. N., Walthert, S. E., Gallagher, S. J., Anderson, L. C., & Stitely, M. L.
- Affiliations
- University of Otago (NZ)
- Corresponding author
- Chester, Aaron N.
- Venue
- BMC Medical Ethics
- Published
- 2017-12
- Volume
- 18
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 70-70
- ISSN
- 1472-6939 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC5715642
- OpenAlex
- W2773303151
- Cited by
- 19
- References
- 19
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 1
- FWCI
- 0.61
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- cc-by
- Locations
- BMC Medical Ethics (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- Funders
- University of Otago
- 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 › Privacy, Security, and Data Protection
- Keywords
- social media use, medical students, search engine use, online patient information, professional ethics, patient safety, online privacy concerns
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Attitude, Cross-Sectional Studies, Ethics, Medical, Female, Humans, Male, New Zealand, Physician-Patient Relations, Physicians, Surveys and Questionnaires, Students, Medical, Focus Groups, Privacy, Young Adult, Information Seeking Behavior, Search Engine, Social Networking, 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