Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27339067›Full record

ArticleBreast cancer research and treatment2016

Learning from social media: utilizing advanced data extraction techniques to understand barriers to breast cancer treatment.

Rachel A Freedman, Kasisomayajula Viswanath, Ines Vaz-Luis, Nancy L Keating

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Breast cancer research and treatment, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

22 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Understanding the Public's Emotions about Cancer: Analysis of Social Media Data.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2020
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  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

4 authors.

Rachel A FreedmanDepartment of Medical Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, 450 Brookline Avenue, Boston, MA, 02215, USA. rafreedman@partners.org.
Kasisomayajula ViswanathCenter for Community-Based Research, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA, USA.
Ines Vaz-LuisDepartment of Medical Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, 450 Brookline Avenue, Boston, MA, 02215, USA.
Nancy L KeatingDepartment of Health Care Policy, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.

Funding

Behavioral Economics and Improving Chemotherapy Decisions for Advanced CancerK24CA181510 · NCI · HARVARD MEDICAL SCHOOL · PI KEATING, NANCY L · 2014 to 2018
$867k
NCI NIH HHS K24 CA181510
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Past examinations of breast cancer treatment barriers have typically included registry, claims-based, and smaller survey studies. We examined treatment barriers using a novel, comprehensive, social media analysis of online, candid discussions about breast cancer. Using an innovative toolset to search postings on social networks, message boards, patient communities, and topical sites, we performed a large-scale qualitative analysis. We examined the sentiments and barriers expressed about breast cancer treatments by Internet users during 1 year (2/1/14-1/31/15). We categorized posts based on thematic patterns and examined trends in discussions by race/ethnicity (white/black/Hispanic) when this information was available. We identified 1,024,041 unique posts related to breast cancer treatment. Overall, 57 % of posts expressed negative sentiments. Using machine learning software, we assigned treatment barriers for 387,238 posts (38 %). Barriers included emotional (23 % of posts), preferences and spiritual/religious beliefs (21 %), physical (18 %), resource (15 %), healthcare perceptions (9 %), treatment processes/duration (7 %), and relationships (7 %). Black and Hispanic (vs. white) users more frequently reported barriers related to healthcare perceptions, beliefs, and pre-diagnosis/diagnosis organizational challenges and fewer emotional barriers. Using a novel analysis of diverse social media users, we observed numerous breast cancer treatment barriers that differed by race/ethnicity. Social media is a powerful tool, allowing use of real-world data for qualitative research, capitalizing on the rich discussions occurring spontaneously online. Future research should focus on how to further employ and learn from this type of social intelligence research across all medical disciplines.

Indexed as

Health Services AccessibilityBreast NeoplasmsFemaleHumansInternetMachine LearningPatient SatisfactionRacial GroupsSocial MediaAdherenceBreast cancerQualitative researchRace and ethnicityUnderserved populations

Identifiers

PMID27339067
PMCPMC5537590

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.