Social media use among patients and caregivers: a scoping review.
Social media use among patients and caregivers: a scoping review.
复制标题
患者和护理人员之间使用社交媒体：范围审查。
DOI：
10.1136/bmjopen-2013-002819
复制
发表时间：
2013-05-09
期刊：
影响因子：
2.9
通讯作者：
Hartling L
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Hamm MP;Chisholm A;Shulhan J;Milne A;Scott SD;Given LM;Hartling L
绘制评估患者和护理人员群体使用社交媒体的现有文献的状态。确定审核范围。Medline， CENTRAL， ERIC, PubMed， CINAHL Plus全文，学术搜索完成，Alt健康观察，健康来源，传播和大众媒体完成，知识网和ProQuest（2000-2012）。关于患者或护理人员使用社交媒体（协作项目、博客/微博客、内容社区、社交网站、虚拟世界）的初步研究报告。两位审稿人筛选研究的合格性；一名审稿人从相关研究中提取数据，另一名审稿人对10%的样本进行准确性和完整性验证。研究人员分析了数据，以描述哪些社交媒体工具正在被使用，由谁使用，目的是什么，以及如何对它们进行评估。共纳入284项研究。论坛非常普遍，占样本的66.6%。其次是社交网站（14.8%）和博客/微博（14.1%）。在77.1%的研究中，该工具的预期目的是促进自我护理。虽然有一些研究集中在类似的情况下（例如，生活方式/体重减轻（12.7%），癌症（11.3%）），但在目标或使用的工具上没有模式。很大一部分研究是描述性的（42.3%）；然而，也有48项（16.9%）随机对照试验（rct）。在随机对照试验中，35.4%报告了统计显著结果，支持对社交媒体干预进行评估；然而，72.9%的人对社交媒体的使用给出了积极的结论。有大量的文献研究了患者和护理人员使用社交媒体的情况。大部分工作都是描述性的；然而，由于使用如此广泛，需要对有效性进行评价。在检查有效性的研究中，尽管没有显著的发现，但经常报告积极的结论。
To map the state of the existing literature evaluating the use of social media in patient and caregiver populations. Scoping review. Medline, CENTRAL, ERIC, PubMed, CINAHL Plus Full Text, Academic Search Complete, Alt Health Watch, Health Source, Communication and Mass Media Complete, Web of Knowledge and ProQuest (2000–2012). Studies reporting primary research on the use of social media (collaborative projects, blogs/microblogs, content communities, social networking sites, virtual worlds) by patients or caregivers. Two reviewers screened studies for eligibility; one reviewer extracted data from relevant studies and a second performed verification for accuracy and completeness on a 10% sample. Data were analysed to describe which social media tools are being used, by whom, for what purpose and how they are being evaluated. Two hundred eighty-four studies were included. Discussion forums were highly prevalent and constitute 66.6% of the sample. Social networking sites (14.8%) and blogs/microblogs (14.1%) were the next most commonly used tools. The intended purpose of the tool was to facilitate self-care in 77.1% of studies. While there were clusters of studies that focused on similar conditions (eg, lifestyle/weight loss (12.7%), cancer (11.3%)), there were no patterns in the objectives or tools used. A large proportion of the studies were descriptive (42.3%); however, there were also 48 (16.9%) randomised controlled trials (RCTs). Among the RCTs, 35.4% reported statistically significant results favouring the social media intervention being evaluated; however, 72.9% presented positive conclusions regarding the use of social media. There is an extensive body of literature examining the use of social media in patient and caregiver populations. Much of this work is descriptive; however, with such widespread use, evaluations of effectiveness are required. In studies that have examined effectiveness, positive conclusions are often reported, despite non-significant findings.
登录
查看更多内容
影响因子：
8
作者：
Crocco, AG;Villasis-Keever, M;Jadad, AR
通讯作者：
Jadad, AR
影响因子：
120.7
作者：
Crocco, AG;Villasis-Keever, M;Jadad, AR
通讯作者：
Jadad, AR
影响因子：
46.9
作者：
Allison, Malorye
通讯作者：
Allison, Malorye
影响因子：
9.7
作者：
Hawn, Carleen
通讯作者：
Hawn, Carleen
影响因子：
7.4
作者：
Kaplan, Andreas M.;Haenlein, Michael
通讯作者：
Haenlein, Michael