Cited by 25Social Media in Health EducationInnovations in Medical EducationPatient-Provider Communication in Healthcare

Medical professionalism: an experimental look at physicians’ Facebook profiles

Open access
Clyde, Joseph W., Rodríguez, Melanie M. Domenech, Geiser, Christian·2014·Medical Education Online

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Use of social networking services (SNS) is on the rise. While many users sign in for personal purposes, it is not uncommon for professionals to connect over SNSs with clients, students, and patients. METHODS: The present study used an experimental approach to examine how medical doctors' SNS profiles impacted potential patients' impressions of professionalism. Participants (N=250 students) were randomly assigned to view one of six Facebook profiles. Profiles were populated with 1) solely professional material, 2) personal material that was strictly healthy, or 3) personal material that included unhealthy behavior. Profiles portrayed a male or female physician resulting in a total of six experimental conditions. Medical professionalism was measured with the First Impressions of Medical Professionalism (FIMP) scale, specifically developed for this study. RESULTS: There was a large and statistically significant main effect for profile type, F(2, 250)=54.77, p<0.001, ηp(2)=0.31. Post hoc tests indicated that personal profiles that contained healthy behavior were rated as most professional followed by profiles with strictly professional content. Personal unhealthy profiles were rated as least professional. Additionally, female profiles consistently received higher professionalism ratings across all three profile types [F(1, 250)=5.04, p=0.026, ηp(2)=0.02]. CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that a physician's SNS profile affects a patient's perception of that physician's medical professionalism. A personal, healthy profile may augment a patient's perception of that physician's character virtues if the profile content upholds the decorum of the medical field.

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 · 10.3402/meo.v19.23149

Cites

39 of 39 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

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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Clyde, J. W., Rodríguez, M. M. D., & Geiser, C.
Affiliations
Utah State University (US)
Corresponding author
Rodríguez, Melanie M. Domenech
Venue
Medical Education Online
Published
2014-01
Volume
19
Issue
1
Pages
23149
ISSN
1087-2981 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2047839867
Cited by
25
References
39
Citations by year
2025: 3 · 2024: 2 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 2
FWCI
3.82
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • Medical Education Online (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Digital Commons - USU (Utah State University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Health › Social Media in Health Education
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Innovations in Medical Education
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Patient-Provider Communication in Healthcare
Keywords
medical professionalism, Facebook, social networking services, patient perspectives, physician-patient relationship, gender differences, health behavior, character virtues
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Age Factors, Aged, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Patients, Perception, Physician's Role, Sex Factors, Socioeconomic Factors, Health Behavior, Young Adult, Social Networking

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