ArticleClinical orthopaedics and related research2012
Online professional networks for physicians: risk management.
Article in Clinical orthopaedics and related research, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
12 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Social media guidelines and best practices: recommendations from the Council of Residency Directors Social Media Task Force.The western journal of emergency medicine · 2014Guideline
- The impact of social media on medical professionalism: a systematic qualitative review of challenges and opportunities.Journal of medical Internet research · 2013Pooled it
- The Impact of Automated Notification on Follow-up of Actionable Tests Pending at Discharge: a Cluster-Randomized Controlled Trial.Journal of general internal medicine · 2018Trial
- Identifying social media professionalism competencies in Vietnamese medical students: a modified Delphi method.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Evaluating the impact of social media marketing from the perspective of orthodontists.BMC oral health · 2024Article
- Orthodontists on Social Media: Instagram's Influence.Turkish journal of orthodontics · 2024Article
- [The Early Mobilization Network].Medizinische Klinik, Intensivmedizin und Notfallmedizin · 2020Review
- Realizing the potential of real-time clinical collaboration in maternal-fetal and obstetric medicine through WhatsApp.Obstetric medicine · 2018Article
- Social media and your practice: navigating the surgeon-patient relationship.Current reviews in musculoskeletal medicine · 2016Review
- Assessment of medical students' attitudes on social media use in medicine: a cross-sectional study.BMC medical education · 2015Article
- How do German veterinarians use social networks? A study, using the example of the 'NOVICE' veterinary medicine network.GMS Zeitschrift fur medizinische Ausbildung · 2013Article
- Should Doctors Be More Careful with Social Media?Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2012Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe rapidly developing array of online physician-only communities represents a potential extraordinary advance in the availability of educational and informational resources to physicians. These online communities provide physicians with a new range of controls over the information they process, but use of this social media technology carries some risk. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: The purpose of this review was to help physicians manage the risks of online professional networking and discuss the potential benefits that may come with such networks. This article explores the risks and benefits of physicians engaging in online professional networking with peers and provides suggestions on risk management.
methodsThrough an Internet search and literature review, we scrutinized available case law, federal regulatory code, and guidelines of conduct from professional organizations and consultants. We reviewed the OrthoMind.com site as a case example because it is currently the only online social network exclusively for orthopaedic surgeons.
resultsExisting case law suggests potential liability for orthopaedic surgeons who engage with patients on openly accessible social network platforms. Current society guidelines in both the United States and Britain provide sensible rules that may mitigate such risks. However, the overall lack of a strong body of legal opinions, government regulations as well as practical experience for most surgeons limit the suitability of such platforms. Closed platforms that are restricted to validated orthopaedic surgeons may limit these downside risks and hence allow surgeons to collaborate with one another both as clinicians and practice owners.
conclusionsEducating surgeons about the pros and cons of participating in these networking platforms is helping them more astutely manage risks and optimize benefits. This evolving online environment of professional interaction is one of few precedents, but the application of risk management strategies that physicians use in daily practice carries over into the online community. This participation should foster ongoing dialogue as new guidelines emerge. This will allow today's orthopaedic surgeon to feel more comfortable with online professional networks and better understand how to make an informed decision regarding their proper use.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.