Evidence map›Paper›PMID 15829472›Full record

ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2005

The role of an online community for people with a rare disease: content analysis of messages posted on a primary biliary cirrhosis mailinglist.

Judith N Lasker, Ellen D Sogolow, Rebecca R Sharim

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 49 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
49citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.7field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

49 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 230 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Judith N LaskerDepartment of Sociology and Anthropology, Lehigh University, 681 Taylor Street, Bethlehem, PA 18015, USA. judith.lasker@lehigh.edu
Ellen D Sogolow
Rebecca R Sharim
Lehigh University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThis study focuses on the role of an Internet-based group for people who have an autoimmune liver disease, primary biliary cirrhosis. Primary biliary cirrhosis is a relatively rare disease, affects primarily women in their 40's and older, and is not well understood. The PBCers Organization (PBC stands for primary biliary cirrhosis) provides electronic mailinglists (listservs) and informational resources for those with primary biliary cirrhosis.

objectives(1) to identify the issues of greatest importance to those posting to the listserv, specifically the relative importance of biomedical, socioemotional, and organizational/systems messages; (2) to compare frequency and content of posts by people at different stages of disease; (3) to identify how people with primary biliary cirrhosis represent the psychosocial challenges and dilemmas (role and identity change, uncertainty, and stigma) identified in the social-scientific literature as key elements of the experience of chronic disease.

methodsThe paper is based on content analysis of messages posted during two months to the Daily Digest listserv for people who have primary biliary cirrhosis. To analyze the posts, we developed a coding system with three major categories--biomedical, socioemotional, and systems/organizations--and 12 codes in each category.

resultsA total of 275 people posted 710 messages. Of the 250 people for whom information on gender was available, 239 (95.6%) were women and 11 (4.4%) were men. Analysis of 710 messages posted to the listserv revealed a predominance of requests for and reports of biomedical information, such as health care providers (32.7%), medications (30.9%), tests and procedures (25.8%), and symptoms (25.7%), combined with very frequent expressions of emotional support. The most frequent single topics were peer support (included in 40.6% of all posts) and positive emotions (25.3%). Posters who reported fewer years since diagnosis were more likely to be seeking biomedical information than those who were further in time from their diagnosis (r= -.241, P<.001, n=313). Those in later stages posted an average of 3.87 messages, compared to an average of 2.64 for people in earlier stages (t= 1.786, P=.08, n=90), which is different from what we expected. No relation between years since diagnosis or age and number of messages was found. Contrary to our expectations, the topics reflecting issues of role change/identity (2.9%), stigma (0.7%), and thoughts about the future (3.9%), all identified in social-scientific literature as key concerns for people with chronic illness, appeared infrequently in this set of messages.

conclusionsMessages exchanged on this particular mailing list have a biomedical, rather than socioemotional or organizational, emphasis. The Internet offers a highly valued opportunity for those with rare diseases to connect with, learn from, and provide support to others having similar experiences. Research that compares those with primary biliary cirrhosis, who are involved in an Internet support group and those who are not, would be an important next step to better understanding the role of the Internet among patients with chronic liver disease and the implications of it in the course of their illness.

Indexed as

InternetLiver Cirrhosis, BiliarySelf-Help GroupsSocial SupportAdultAgedChronic DiseaseElectronic MailFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPatient Education as TopicRare Diseases

Identifiers

PMID15829472
PMCPMC1550634
OpenAlexW1978620498

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.