Blurred lines: the General Medical Council guidance on doctors and social media
Open accessAbstract
Digital technology in the early 21st century has introduced significant changes to everyday life and the ways in which we practise medicine. It is important that the ease and practicality of accessing and disseminating information does not intrude on the high standards expected of doctors, and that the boundaries between professional and public life do not become blurred through the increasing adoption of social media. This said, as with any such profound disruption, the social media age could be responsible for driving a new understanding of what it means to be a medical professional.
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?
Interaction between HCPs and patients is inevitably happening on SNSs, with professional boundaries being blurred and potentially crossed.
“Interaction between HCPs and patients is inevitably happening on SNSs, with professional boundaries being blurred and potentially crossed [28].”
From Differences between doctors of medicine and dental medicine in the perception of professionalism on social networking sites: the development of the e-professionalism assessment compatibility index (ePACI) (2022) · cites this paper as [28]
The paper discusses patients contacting doctors through personal social-media profiles (unnamed section; page unavailable) and identifies personal–professional boundary crossing as a risk (Benefits versus risks; page unavailable). It does not establish that HCP–patient interactions on social networking sites are inevitable, and it frames boundary crossing as a risk rather than something that necessarily occurs. (LLM, conf=0.84)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredA form of vagueness has risen in adopting a professional approach on various social media platforms.
“Consequently, a form of vagueness has risen in adopting a professional approach on the various social media platforms [12].”
From Future healthcare providers and professionalism on social media: a cross-sectional study (2022) · cites this paper as [12]
The questionnaire was developed after a thorough literature review, reviewed, and piloted.
“We developed the questionnaire after a thorough literature review [10–12, 21, 22, 27–31]. We then carefully reviewed the questions and decided on answers that represent more ethical consensus [11, 22, 27, 28]. Lastly, we revised and piloted the final draft of the questionnaire.”
From Future healthcare providers and professionalism on social media: a cross-sectional study (2022) · cites this paper as [12]
The majority's view that professional standards differ between real and virtual worlds is perhaps due to widespread misguidance of healthcare students in numerous countries on the professional use of social media and the hasty transcendence of professionalism from face-to-face consultations to online interactions.
“This is perhaps due to the widespread misguidance of healthcare students in numerous countries on the professional use of social media and the hasty transcendence of professionalism from face-to-face consultations to online interactions [3, 12].”
From Future healthcare providers and professionalism on social media: a cross-sectional study (2022) · cites this paper as [12]
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
Social Media Use in Medical Education: A Systematic Review
Cheston, C. C., Flickinger, T. E., & Chisolm, M. S. (2013) · Academic Medicine · doi:10.1097/acm.0b013e31828ffc23 · Cited by 638 · see citing works
Spurling, G., Mansfield, P. R., Montgomery, B. D., Lexchin, J., Doust, J. A., Othman, N., & Vitry, A. I. (2010) · PLoS Medicine · doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1000352 · Cited by 529 · see citing works
Wallace, S., Clark, M., & White, J. (2012) · BMJ Open · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2012-001099 · Cited by 432 · see citing works
Harnessing the cloud of patient experience: using social media to detect poor quality healthcare
Greaves, F., Ramirez-Cano, D., Millett, C., Darzi, A., & Donaldson, L. (2013) · BMJ Quality & Safety · doi:10.1136/bmjqs-2012-001527 · Cited by 272 · see citing works
(2011) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.2011.68 · Cited by 236 · see citing works
Smarter than you think: how technology is changing our minds for the better
(2014) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.51-3207 · Cited by 156 · see citing works
Social Media and Medical Professionalism: Rethinking the Debate and the Way Forward
Fenwick, T. (2014) · Academic Medicine · doi:10.1097/acm.0000000000000436 · Cited by 34 · see citing works
Tejpar, S. (2011) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.2011.88 · Cited by 13 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Strategies to combat medical misinformation on social media
Trethewey, S. P. (2019) · Postgraduate Medical Journal · doi:10.1136/postgradmedj-2019-137201 · Cited by 74 · see citing works
Future healthcare providers and professionalism on social media: a cross-sectional study
Soubra, R., Hasan, I., Ftouni, L., Saab, A., & Shaarani, I. (2022) · BMC Medical Ethics · doi:10.1186/s12910-022-00742-7 · Cited by 26 · see citing works
Sensationalist social media usage by doctors and dentists during Covid-19
Law, R. W. M., Kanagasingam, S., & Choong, K. A. (2021) · Digital Health · doi:10.1177/20552076211028034 · Cited by 19 · see citing works
The Development of Social Media Guidelines for Psychologists and for Regulatory Use
Drude, K. P., & Messer-Engel, K. (2020) · Journal of Technology in Behavioral Science · doi:10.1007/s41347-020-00176-1 · Cited by 13 · see citing works
Jones, S., Chudleigh, M., Baines, R., & Jones, R. B. (2020) · Nurse Education in Practice · doi:10.1016/j.nepr.2020.102950 · Cited by 13 · see citing works
Imran, S., Yasmeen, R., & Mansoor, M. (2024) · BMC Medical Education · doi:10.1186/s12909-024-05142-6 · Cited by 12 · see citing works
E-Professionalism: challenges of being social in social media in health profession
Imran, N., & Jawaid, M. (2021) · Health Professions Educator Journal · doi:10.53708/hpej.v4i1.1301 · Cited by 12 · see citing works
Upvote or Downvote ABA for Autism? Content and Support in Reddit Posts
Saar, K. W., Saar, M., Bellon-Harn, M. L., Harn, W. E., Boyd, R., & Manchaiah, V. (2023) · Journal of Consumer Health on the Internet · doi:10.1080/15398285.2023.2193932 · Cited by 10 · see citing works
Viskić, J., Marelić, M., Machala Poplašen, L., & Vukušić Rukavina, T. (2022) · BMC Medical Ethics · doi:10.1186/s12910-022-00870-0 · Cited by 10 · see citing works
“Interaction between HCPs and patients is inevitably happening on SNSs, with professional boundaries being blurred and potentially crossed [28].”
BackgroundTwittering on about mental health: is it worth the effort?
Jayaram, M., Moran, L., & Adams, C. E. (2017) · Evidence-Based Mental Health · doi:10.1136/eb-2016-102580 · Cited by 9 · see citing works
ZENGİN, G. (2023) · Selçuk Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi · doi:10.52642/susbed.1227295 · Cited by 7 · see citing works
Liu, Y., Ren, W., Qiu, Y., & Ren, J. (2018) · Telemedicine Journal and e-Health · doi:10.1089/tmj.2017.0235 · Cited by 5 · see citing works
Social Media and Oncology: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly
Wang, L., Katz, M. S., & Song, Y. P. (2022) · Clinical Oncology · doi:10.1016/j.clon.2022.11.005 · Cited by 5 · see citing works
Cassalia, F., Danese, A., D’Acunto, C., Russo, A., Zengarini, C., Plaça, M. L., Ciolfi, C., Scolaro, F., Stanganelli, I., Cusano, F., et al. (2026) · Dermatology Practical & Conceptual · doi:10.5826/dpc.1602a6556 · Cited by 1 · see citing works
Information Technology in Daily Practice in Obstetrics and Gynaecology
Prosser‐Snelling, E., & Morris, E. (2018) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781316831748.005
Systematic Literature Review on the use of Social Media and engagement by NHS Trusts (Preprint)Preprint
Sethi, S., Bhogal, R., Luengo, S., Gokani, N., Zuberi, S. J., Tanna, S., Grewal, J., & Gohil, S. (2018) · doi:10.2196/preprints.12197
Viskić, J., Marelić, M., Poplašen, L. M., & Rukavina, T. V. (2022) · Research Square · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-1715693/v1
Viskić, J., Marelić, M., Poplašen, L. M., & Vukušić Rukavina, T. (2024) · Figshare · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.26550931
Imran, S., Yasmeen, R., & Mansoor, M. (2024) · Figshare · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.25357751
- Authors
- Cork, N., & Grant, P.
- Affiliations
- University of Cambridge (GB)
- Churchill Hospital (GB)
- ORCID
- Cork, Nick
- Venue
- Clinical Medicine
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2016-06
- Volume
- 16
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 219-222
- ISSN
- 1470-2118 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC5922698
- OpenAlex
- W2465682061
- Cited by
- 20
- References
- 8
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 1
- FWCI
- 2.20
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Clinical Medicine (publishedVersion, other-oa)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Health › Social Media in Health Education
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Medical and Health Sciences Research
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health, Medicine and Society
- Keywords
- social media, physicians, General Medical Council guidance, professional boundaries, professional conduct, medical professionalism, digital technology in medicine
- MeSH terms
- Humans, Physicians, Social Media, Mobile Applications
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
