Cited by 82Social Media in Health EducationSocial Media and PoliticsImpact of Technology on Adolescents

ReCAP: Social Media Use Among Physicians and Trainees: Results of a National Medical Oncology Physician Survey

Adilman, Rachel, Rajmohan, Yanchini, Brooks, Edward, Urgoiti, Gloria Roldan, Chung, Caroline, Hammad, Nazik, Trinkaus, Martina, Naseem, Madiha +10 more·2016·Journal of Oncology Practice

Abstract

QUESTION ASKED: To what extent, and for what purpose, do oncology physicians and physicians-in-training use Web-based social media? SUMMARY ANSWER: Despite the ability of social media to enhance collaboration and knowledge dissemination among health care providers, this cohort survey study identified an overall low use of social media among oncologists, and significant generational gaps and differences in patterns of use. METHODS: A nine-item survey was designed using a survey-generating Web site (SurveyMonkey) and was distributed securely via weekly e-mail messages to 680 oncology physicians and physicians-in-training from July 2013 through September 2013. All responses were received anonymously. Results were analyzed and are reported using descriptive statistics. RESULTS: Of 680 surveys sent, 207 were completed, for a response rate of 30.4%. Social media were used by 72% of our survey respondents (95% CI, 66% to 78%; Table 1 ). Results were cross tabulated by age, which revealed a significant difference in social media use by age group, with 89% of trainees, 93% of fellows, and 72% of early-career oncologists reporting social media use, compared with only 39% of mid-career oncologists (P < .05). Respondents reported using each social media platform for either personal or professional purposes, but rarely both. When respondents were questioned regarding barriers to social media use and their hesitations around joining a medically related social media site, the majority (59%) answered, “I don't have enough time.” [Table: see text] BIAS, CONFOUNDING FACTOR(S), DRAWBACKS: This study was conducted online, via e-mail. Therefore, respondents may represent a subpopulation of individuals who already prefer using Web-based technologies and may be more inclined to use social media, compared with individuals who do not use e-mail and were, by default, excluded from the study. We assumed, in designing this study, that the proportion of practicing oncology physicians who do not use e-mail is low. Although our sample size is small, it does represent one third of all registered medical oncologists in Canada. Finally, the high percentage of medical oncologist respondents and the concomitantly low fraction of respondents from other specialties may mean these results are more telling of social media habits in the aforementioned demographic rather than other oncology specialties. REAL-LIFE IMPLICATIONS: Our study revealed that oncology physicians and physicians-in-training who participate in Web-based social networking are largely within the younger age cohorts, whereas mid-career oncologists (age 45 to 54 years) are largely absent from the social media scene. Gaps in social networking use between younger physicians and trainees and older generations of physicians may result in critical gaps in communication, collaboration, and mentorship between these demographics. It is hoped that with further research into understanding patterns of use and limitations, medical professionals and trainees may increase their use of social media for networking, education, mentorship, and improved patient care.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1200/jop.2015.006429

Cites

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?

  • Most included studies (n=77) had clear ethical statements within the paper either stating ethical board approval or exemption, and 11 studies did not explicitly report an ethical statement.

    “Most studies included (n=77) had clear ethical statements within the paper either stating ethical board approval or exemption, and 11 studies did not explicitly report an ethical statement [37-39,53,54,72,74,90,105,108,117].”
  • Lower rates of social media use were seen in practicing health care professionals, physicians of different specialties, and program directors or faculty, mostly ranging from 50% to 80%.

    “Lower rates of use were seen in practicing HCPs, physicians of different specialties, and program directors (PDs) or faculty, mostly ranging from 50% to 80% [35,39,74,80,83,85,86,88,89,91,96,105,106,108,110,113,114].”
  • Adilaman et al's study demonstrates a significant gap in social media use between younger users and mid- to late-career users.

    “As shown in Adilaman et al’s [74] study, this demonstrates a significant gap in SM use between younger users and mid- to late-career users.”
  • Lack of free time or time constraint was often recognized as a barrier.

    “Lack of free time or time constraint was often recognized as a barrier [39,69,74,79,91,93,96], as well as lack of knowledge or technical skills for use of SM [33,39,76,79,93,118].”
  • Midcareer physicians (aged 45-54 years) had statistically significantly more hesitations around joining medically geared social media sites for professional purposes, compared with those aged 25-34 years.

    “This study also found that midcareer physicians (aged 45-54 years) had statistically significantly more hesitations around joining medically geared SM sites for professional purposes, compared with those aged 25-34 years [74].”

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 10 · Cited by 82

Authors
Adilman, R., Rajmohan, Y., Brooks, E., Urgoiti, G. R., Chung, C., Hammad, N., Trinkaus, M., Naseem, M., Simmons, C., Adilman, R., Rajmohan, Y., Brooks, E., Roldan Urgoiti, G., Chung, C., Hammad, N., Trinkaus, M., Naseem, M., & Simmons, C.
Affiliations
  • British Columbia Cancer Agency Vancouver Centre, Vancouver, British Columbia; University of Waterloo, Waterloo; Princess Margaret Hospital; St Michael’s Hospital; University of Toronto, Toronto; Queen’s University, Kingston, Ontario; and University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
  • British Columbia Cancer Agency Vancouver Centre, Vancouver, British Columbia; University of Waterloo, Waterloo; Princess Margaret Hospital; St Michael's Hospital; University of Toronto, Toronto; Queen's University, Kingston, Ontario; and University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
Venue
Journal of Oncology Practice
Published
2016-01
Volume
12
Issue
1
Pages
79-80
ISSN
  • 1554-7477 (ISSN-L)
  • 1935-469X
OpenAlex
W2239106233
Cited by
82
References
10
Citations by year
2025: 7 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 15 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 12 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 1
FWCI
13.21
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Oncology Practice (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Health › Social Media in Health Education
  • Social Sciences › Communication › Social Media and Politics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Impact of Technology on Adolescents
Keywords
social media use, medical oncologists, medical trainees, generational differences, barriers to social media use, professional networking, physician-patient communication, physician-patient relationship, medical education, South America, Asia, Europe, Middle East, Africa
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Attitude of Health Personnel, Canada, Humans, Medical Oncology, Middle Aged, Physicians, Surveys and Questionnaires, Cohort Studies, Young Adult, Social Media, Web Browser

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