From Help-Seekers to Influential Users: A Systematic Review of Participation Styles in Online Health Communities.
From Help-Seekers to Influential Users: A Systematic Review of Participation Styles in Online Health Communities.
复制标题
DOI：
10.2196/jmir.4705
复制
发表时间：
2015-12-01
影响因子：
7.4
通讯作者：
Griffiths KM
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Carron-Arthur B;Ali K;Cunningham JA;Griffiths KM
了解人们如何参与在线健康社区 (OHC) 并为其做出贡献是多个领域的有用知识。它有助于社区管理者制定社区建设策略，有助于组织传播有关健康干预措施的信息，也有助于研究人员了解同伴支持的社会动态。我们试图确定在线健康社区的用户参与性质是否存在明显的模式。当前的研究对所有研究进行了系统回顾，这些研究调查了在线健康社区的参与性质，并提供了一种根据参与风格对个人进行分类的量化方法。系统检索产生了 20 篇论文。参与风格分为多维（基于多个指标）或单维（基于一个指标）。对于多维类别，总共确定了 41 种不同的参与风格，从作为董事会领导者的有影响力的用户到专注于特定主题并倾向于回复而不是发起帖子的主题聚焦响应者。然而，不同健康状况的 OHC 之间和特定健康状况的 OHC 内部所确定的参与方式几乎没有重叠。 41 种风格中的 5 种在不止一项研究中出现（中心、权威、促进者、主要给予者和讨论者），但其余的仅在一项研究中报告。单维研究的重点是参与度，特别是高参与度用户。使用八种不同的指标来评估参与度，其中最关注的是帖子的频率。除了基于高发帖频率的高参与度用户之外，当前的审查几乎没有发现不同健康社区之间一致的参与方式的证据。然而，这一领域的研究还处于起步阶段，该综述中的大多数研究都是在过去两年内发表的。尽管如此，该综述提供了 OHC 参与方式和指标的术语，并讨论了重要的方法论问题，这将为该领域未来的比较研究奠定基础。需要进一步的研究来系统地调查一系列参与方式，调查它们与不同类型的在线健康社区的关联，并确定在线健康社区内部和之间不同参与方式的贡献。
Understanding how people participate in and contribute to online health communities (OHCs) is useful knowledge in multiple domains. It is helpful for community managers in developing strategies for building community, for organizations in disseminating information about health interventions, and for researchers in understanding the social dynamics of peer support. We sought to determine if any patterns were apparent in the nature of user participation across online health communities. The current study involved a systematic review of all studies that have investigated the nature of participation in an online health community and have provided a quantifiable method for categorizing a person based on their participation style. A systematic search yielded 20 papers. Participatory styles were classified as either multidimensional (based on multiple metrics) or unidimensional (based on one metric). With respect to the multidimensional category, a total of 41 different participation styles were identified ranging from Influential Users who were leaders on the board to Topic-Focused Responders who focused on a specific topic and tended to respond to rather than initiate posts. However, there was little overlap in participation styles identified both across OHCs for different health conditions and within OHCs for specific health conditions. Five of the 41 styles emerged in more than one study (Hubs, Authorities, Facilitators, Prime Givers, and Discussants), but the remainder were reported in only one study. The focus of the unidimensional studies was on level of engagement and particularly on high-engaged users. Eight different metrics were used to evaluate level of engagement with the greatest focus on frequency of posts. With the exception of high-engaged users based on high post frequency, the current review found little evidence for consistent participatory styles across different health communities. However, this area of research is in its infancy, with most of the studies included in the review being published in the last 2 years. Nevertheless, the review delivers a nomenclature for OHC participation styles and metrics and discusses important methodological issues that will provide a basis for future comparative research in the area. Further studies are required to systematically investigate a range of participatory styles, to investigate their association with different types of online health communities and to determine the contribution of different participatory styles within and across online health communities.