Social network sites as a mode to collect health data: a systematic review.
Social network sites as a mode to collect health data: a systematic review.
复制标题
DOI：
10.2196/jmir.3050
复制
发表时间：
2014-07-14
影响因子：
7.4
通讯作者：
Majeed, Azeem
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Alshaikh, Fahdah;Ramzan, Farzan;Majeed, Azeem
背景技术背景：到目前为止，健康研究文献集中在社会网络网站（SNS）作为工具，提供医疗保健，研究这些网络对行为的影响，或分析Web健康内容。较少被称为这些网站的有效性作为一种方法收集数据的健康研究和手段，使用这种强大的工具在health research.Objective：本研究的目的是系统地回顾现有文献，并探讨使用SNS作为一种模式收集数据的健康research。这篇综述旨在回答四个问题：健康研究是否使用SNS作为收集数据的方法？数据质量是否受到数据收集模式的影响？SNS接触到哪些类型的参与者？SNS的优势和局限性是什么？方法：2013年3月，通过检索数据库MEDLINE、Embase和PsycINFO，使用奥维德和PubMed界面对1996年至2013年3月第3周的文献进行了系统性综述。检索结果由2名评价者进行审查，并根据预先设定的protocol.Results：排除，纳入和质量评估进行了纳入标准的10个研究，结果进行了分析，回答了审查问题。有四个主要结果。(1)SNS已被健康研究人员用作数据收集工具;除1项研究外，所有纳入的研究均为横断面和定量研究。(2)报告的数据质量指标包括答复率、费用、及时性、缺失数据/完成率和有效性。然而，只对答复率和费用进行了比较，因为不清楚如何衡量其他报告的指标。(3)目标人群中最多的是女性和年轻人。(4)所有的研究表明，SNS是一种有效的招聘方法，但它可能会引入抽样bias.CONCLUSIONS：SNS在健康研究中的作用，但我们需要确定如何有效地使用它，而不影响研究质量。SNS领域正在迅速发展，有必要利用这一工具的优势，并通过有效的研究设计来避免其局限性。这篇综述为计划使用SNS进行研究的学者提供了重要的见解。
BACKGROUND: To date, health research literature has focused on social network sites (SNS) either as tools to deliver health care, to study the effect of these networks on behavior, or to analyze Web health content. Less is known about the effectiveness of these sites as a method for collecting data for health research and the means to use such powerful tools in health research.OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to systematically review the available literature and explore the use of SNS as a mode of collecting data for health research. The review aims to answer four questions: Does health research employ SNS as method for collecting data? Is data quality affected by the mode of data collection? What types of participants were reached by SNS? What are the strengths and limitations of SNS?METHODS: The literature was reviewed systematically in March 2013 by searching the databases MEDLINE, Embase, and PsycINFO, using the Ovid and PubMed interface from 1996 to the third week of March 2013. The search results were examined by 2 reviewers, and exclusion, inclusion, and quality assessment were carried out based on a pre-set protocol.RESULTS: The inclusion criteria were met by 10 studies and results were analyzed descriptively to answer the review questions. There were four main results. (1) SNS have been used as a data collection tool by health researchers; all but 1 of the included studies were cross-sectional and quantitative. (2) Data quality indicators that were reported include response rate, cost, timeliness, missing data/completion rate, and validity. However, comparison was carried out only for response rate and cost as it was unclear how other reported indicators were measured. (3) The most targeted population were females and younger people. (4) All studies stated that SNS is an effective recruitment method but that it may introduce a sampling bias.CONCLUSIONS: SNS has a role in health research, but we need to ascertain how to use it effectively without affecting the quality of research. The field of SNS is growing rapidly, and it is necessary to take advantage of the strengths of this tool and to avoid its limitations by effective research design. This review provides an important insight for scholars who plan to conduct research using SNS.