Cited by 56Social Media in Health EducationEducational Technology in LearningInnovations in Medical Education

Facebook Groups as a Powerful and Dynamic Tool in Medical Education: Mixed-Method Study

Open access
Nicolai, Leo, Schmidbauer, Moritz, Gradel, Maximilian, Ferch, Sabine, Antón, Sofía, Hoppe, Boj, Pander, Tanja, von der Borch, Philip +3 more·2017·Journal of Medical Internet Research

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Social networking sites, in particular Facebook, are not only predominant in students' social life but are to varying degrees interwoven with the medical curriculum. Particularly, Facebook groups have been identified for their potential in higher education. However, there is a paucity of data on user types, content, and dynamics of study-related Facebook groups. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to identify the role of study-related Facebook group use, characterize medical students that use or avoid using Facebook groups (demographics, participation pattern, and motivation), and analyze student posting behavior, covered topics, dynamics, and limitations in Facebook groups with regards to educational usage. METHODS: Using a multi-method approach (interviews, focus groups, and qualitative and quantitative analysis of Facebook posts), we analyzed two representative Facebook groups of medical preclinical semesters at Ludwig-Maximilians-University (LMU) Munich. Facebook primary posts and replies over one semester were extracted and evaluated by using thematic content analysis. We developed and applied a coding scheme for studying the frequency and distribution of these posts. Additionally, we interviewed students with various degrees of involvement in the groups, as well as "new minorities," students not registered on Facebook. RESULTS: Facebook groups seem to have evolved as the main tool for medical students at LMU to complement the curriculum and to discuss study-related content. These Facebook groups are self-organizing and quickly adapt to organizational or subject-related challenges posed by the curriculum. A wide range of topics is covered, with a dominance of organization-related posts (58.35% [6916/11,853] of overall posts). By measuring reply rates and comments per category, we were able to identify learning tips and strategies, material sharing, and course content discussions as the most relevant categories. Rates of adequate replies in these categories ranged between 78% (11/14) and 100% (13/13), and the number of comments per post ranged from 8.4 to 13.7 compared with the average overall reply rate of 68.69% (1167/1699) and 3.9 comments per post. User typology revealed social media drivers (>30 posts per semester) as engines of group function, frequent users (11-30 posts), and a majority of average users acting rather as consumers or lurkers (1-10 posts). CONCLUSIONS: For the moment, the medical faculty has no active involvement in these groups and therefore no influence on accuracy of information, professionalism, and ethical issues. Nevertheless, faculty could in the future benefit by extracting relevant information, identifying common problems, and understanding semester-related dynamics.

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 · 10.2196/jmir.7990

Cites

43 of 43 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?

  • 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 [58]

    The Discussion section reports students sharing material, knowledge, and experience through Facebook groups, while the Introduction describes peer support and social interaction. The paper does not show that these groups gave students access to experts they otherwise could not contact; its Results instead describe some students contacting peers or faculty outside Facebook to obtain information. (LLM, conf=0.85)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Several studies have demonstrated that students use 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, for gaining access to information from experts with whom they otherwise would not be able to connect, or for creating communities that can then be used as a 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 [58]

    The Introduction (Social Networking Sites in Education and The Role of Facebook Groups; page unavailable) describes knowledge sharing, social support, and self-organized student learning communities. The paper does not show that students used social media to reach experts they otherwise could not contact; its Results (User Typologies and Motivation; page unavailable) instead describe students contacting peers and faculty through alternative channels. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • A total of 11 studies conducted in-depth or semistructured interviews, and 6 studies used focus groups.

    “A total of 11 studies conducted in-depth or semistructured interviews [34,36,44,49,58,65,73,76,97,104,117], and 6 studies used focus groups [45,49,58,70,112,117].”

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: 3

  1. [8]Stutzman F Our lives, our facebooks 2006 INSNA conference 2006 Vancouver, Canada
  2. [10]Lee MJ McLoughlin C Harnessing the affordances of Web 2.0 and social software tools: Can we finally make “student-centered” learning a reality? 2008 6 30 Proceedings of World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia and Telecommunications 2008 Vienna, Austria
  3. [49]Gil-Or O Researchgate 2010 2017-05-06 Building consumer demand by using viral marketing tactics within an online social network https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Oren_Gil-Or/publication/46560133_Building_Consumer_Demand_by_using_Viral_Marketing_Tactics_within_an_Online_Social_Network/links/0deec5351227bac386000000.pdf

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Nicolai, L., Schmidbauer, M., Gradel, M., Ferch, S., Antón, S., Hoppe, B., Pander, T., von der Borch, P., Pinilla, S., Fischer, M., & Dimitriadis, K.
Affiliations
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München (DE)
Corresponding author
Nicolai, Leo
Venue
Journal of Medical Internet Research
Published
2017-12-22
Volume
19
Issue
12
Pages
e408
ISSN
1438-8871 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2780005797
Cited by
56
References
43
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 5
FWCI
5.17
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • Journal of Medical Internet Research (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Bern Open Repository and Information System (University of Bern) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Health › Social Media in Health Education
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Educational Technology in Learning
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Innovations in Medical Education
Keywords
Facebook groups, medical students, social networking sites, medical education, student-generated content, user typology, lurkers, self-organized learning, preclinical education, information accuracy, professionalism, ethical considerations, faculty involvement, learning strategies
MeSH terms
Education, Medical, Female, Humans, Learning, Male, 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