Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22709387›Full record

ReviewThe Milbank quarterly2012

Health and illness in a connected world: how might sharing experiences on the internet affect people's health?

Sue Ziebland, Sally Wyke

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in The Milbank quarterly, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 170 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
170citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

170 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. The Role of Seed Users in Nurturing an Online Health Community for Smoking Cessation Among People With HIV/AIDS.Annals of behavioral medicine : a publication of the Society of Behavioral Medicine · 2024
    Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Patient narratives in an online hernia peer-support community: a qualitative netnographic analysis.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2026
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

110 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

2 authors.

Sue ZieblandDepartment of Primary Health Care Sciences, University of Oxford, 23–38 Hythe Bridge Street, Oxford OX1 2ET, United Kingdom.sue.ziebland@phc.ox.ac.uk
Sally Wyke

Funding

Department of Health RP-PG-0608-10147
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

contextThe use of the Internet for peer-to-peer connection has been one of its most dramatic and transformational features. Yet this is a new field with no agreement on a theoretical and methodological basis. The scientific base underpinning this activity needs strengthening, especially given the explosion of web resources that feature experiences posted by patients themselves. This review informs a National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) (UK) research program on the impact of online patients' accounts of their experiences with health and health care, which includes the development and validation of a new e-health impact questionnaire.

methodsWe drew on realist review methods to conduct a conceptual review of literature in the social and health sciences. We developed a matrix to summarize the results, which we then distilled from a wide and diverse reading of the literature. We continued reading until we reached data saturation and then further refined the results after testing them with expert colleagues and a public user panel.

findingsWe identified seven domains through which online patients' experiences could affect health. Each has the potential for positive and negative impacts. Five of the identified domains (finding information, feeling supported, maintaining relationships with others, affecting behavior, and experiencing health services) are relatively well rehearsed, while two (learning to tell the story and visualizing disease) are less acknowledged but important features of online resources.

conclusionsThe value of first-person accounts, the appeal and memorability of stories, and the need to make contact with peers all strongly suggest that reading and hearing others' accounts of their own experiences of health and illnesss will remain a key feature of e-health. The act of participating in the creation of health information (e.g., through blogging and contributing to social networking on health topics) also influences patients' experiences and has implications for our understanding of their role in their own health care management and information.

Indexed as

Health Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeInternetSocial NetworkingHealth Services ResearchHumansOnline SystemsPatientsUnited Kingdom

Identifiers

PMID22709387
PMCPMC3460203

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.