CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 51Social Media in Health EducationInnovations in Medical EducationImpact of Technology on Adolescents

Online professionalism: A synthetic review

Chretien, Katherine C., Tuck, Matthew G.·2015·International Review of Psychiatry
DOI 10.3109/09540261.2015.1004305
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

The rise of social media has increased connectivity and blurred personal and professional boundaries, bringing new challenges for medical professionalism. Whether traditional professionalism principles apply to the online social media space remains unknown. The purpose of this synthetic literature review was to characterize the original peer-reviewed research studies published between 1 January 2000-1 November 2014 on online professionalism, to assess methodologies and approaches used, and to provide insights to guide future studies in this area. The investigators searched three databases and performed manual searches of bibliographies to identify the 32 studies included. Most studies originated in the USA. Cross-sectional surveys and analyses of publicly available online content were the most common methodologies employed. Studies covered the general areas of use and privacy, assessment of unprofessional online behaviours, consensus-gathering of what constitutes unprofessional or inappropriate online behaviours, and education and policies. Studies were of variable quality; only around half of survey studies had response rates of 50% or greater. Medical trainees were the most common population studied. Future directions for research include public perspectives of online professionalism, impact on patient trust, and how to use social media productively as medical professionals.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3109/09540261.2015.1004305

Cites

40 of 40 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?

  • A recent review of online professionalism studies found that themes involving patient identifying images, inappropriate communications, and discriminatory language were consistently regarded as most inappropriate, whereas derogatory speech, images of alcohol, and partial nudity were considered only moderate to least inappropriate.

    “A recent review of online professionalism studies found that themes involving patient identifying images, inappropriate communications, and discriminatory language were consistently regarded as most inappropriate, whereas derogatory speech, images of alcohol, and partial nudity were considered only moderate to least inappropriate. 12”

    From Perceptions of Unprofessional Social Media Behavior Among Emergency Medicine Physicians (2017) · cites this paper as [12]

  • Consensus on what constitutes unprofessional behavior remains elusive.

    “Although issues of SM professionalism are prevalent, consensus on what constitutes unprofessional behavior remains elusive.”

    From Perceptions of Unprofessional Social Media Behavior Among Emergency Medicine Physicians (2017) · cites this paper as [12]

  • Our findings are consistent with prior evidence: a high level of consensus for investigation in themes involving confidentiality, inappropriate communication, and discrimination, and a low consensus for themes associated with social identity, including derogatory speech and images of alcohol (with and without intoxication).

    “Our findings are consistent with prior evidence: a high level of consensus for investigation in themes involving confidentiality, inappropriate communication, and discrimination, and a low consensus for themes associated with social identity, including derogatory speech and images of alcohol (with and without intoxication).”

    From Perceptions of Unprofessional Social Media Behavior Among Emergency Medicine Physicians (2017) · cites this paper as [12]

  • Prior reviews focused on e-professionalism of medical students, residents, or physicians, or presented a full spectrum of social media-related challenges and opportunities in the context of medical professionalism of diverse types of health care professionals, but these studies were conducted almost 6 years ago.

    “Prior reviews have focused on the e-professionalism of medical students, residents, or physicians [14], or have presented a full spectrum of SM-related challenges and opportunities in the context of medical professionalism of diverse types of HCPs [15,16], but these studies were conducted almost 6 years ago.”

    From Dangers and Benefits of Social Media on E-Professionalism of Health Care Professionals: Scoping Review (2021) · cites this paper as [14]

  • Chretien and Tuck's review of online professionalism studies found that themes involving patient identifying images, inappropriate communications, and discriminatory language were consistently regarded as most inappropriate, whereas derogatory speech, images of alcohol, and partial nudity were considered only moderate to least inappropriate.

    “Chretien and Tuck’s [14] review of online professionalism studies found that themes involving patient identifying images, inappropriate communications, and discriminatory language were consistently regarded as most inappropriate, whereas derogatory speech, images of alcohol, and partial nudity were considered only moderate to least inappropriate.”

    From Dangers and Benefits of Social Media on E-Professionalism of Health Care Professionals: Scoping Review (2021) · cites this paper as [14]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Chretien, K. C., & Tuck, M. G.
Affiliations
George Washington University (US)
Corresponding author
Chretien, Katherine C.
ORCID
Venue
International Review of Psychiatry
Publisher
Informa UK Limited
Published
2015-03-04
Volume
27
Issue
2
Pages
106-117
ISSN
  • 0954-0261 (ISSN-L)
  • 1369-1627
DOI
10.3109/09540261.2015.1004305
OpenAlex
W2162046397
Semantic Scholar
5e3eb7c90f3dfcb1000c35a3c4985987ac7547e6
Cited by
49
References
40
Citations by year
2025: 3 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 2
FWCI
0.71
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • International Review of Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Health › Social Media in Health Education
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Innovations in Medical Education
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Impact of Technology on Adolescents
Keywords
online professionalism, medical professionalism, social media, medical trainees, professional boundaries, online privacy, medical education, patient trust
MeSH terms
Professionalism, Humans, Privacy, Professional Misconduct, 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