Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28007689›Full record

ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2016

The Role of Online Social Support in Supporting and Educating Parents of Young Children With Special Health Care Needs in the United States: A Scoping Review.

Beth A DeHoff, Lisa K Staten, Rylin Christine Rodgers, Scott C Denne

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 62 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
62citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Content Analysis of a Congenital Cataract Social Media Support Group.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2025
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

2 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

4 authors.

Beth A DeHoffNeonatology, Department of Pediatrics, Indiana University Health Physicians, Indianapolis, IN, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-2695-5978
Lisa K StatenDepartment of Social and Behavioral Sciences, Richard M. Fairbanks School of Public Health, Indiana University, Indianapolis, IN, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-6056-4153
Rylin Christine RodgersRiley Child Development Center, Department of Pediatrics, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-9768-7333
Scott C DenneNeonatology, Department of Pediatrics, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-7512-3449

Funding

Indiana Clinical and Translational Sciences InstituteUL1TR001108 · NCATS · INDIANA UNIVERSITY INDIANAPOLIS · PI DENNE, SCOTT C., SHEKHAR, ANANTHA · 2013 to 2017
$23.3M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR001108
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWhen parents of young children with special health care needs (CSHCN) receive their child's diagnosis, they encounter information they may not understand, emotions they may not know how to cope with, and questions about their child's immediate and long-term future that frequently lack answers. The challenge of health care providers is how to prepare parents for caring for their CSHCN, for coping with any resulting challenges, and for accessing the systems and services that can assist them.

objectiveThe purpose of this work was to review evidence of the information and support needs of parents of young CSHCN and to determine whether online social support can serve as an avenue for learning and empowerment for these parents.

methodsA scoping review identified the challenges, coping mechanisms, and support needs among parents of CSHCN, and the reach and effectiveness of digital technologies with these families and health care providers. We also conducted interviews with professionals serving parents of CSHCN.

resultsThe literature review and interviews suggested that parents best learn the information they need, and cope with the emotional challenges of raising a CSHCN, with support from other parents of CSHCN, and that young parents in recent years have most often been finding this parent-to-parent support through digital media, particularly social media, consistent with the theory of online social support. Evidence also shows that social media, particularly Facebook, is used by nearly all women aged 18-29 years across racial and socioeconomic lines in the United States.

conclusionsParents of young CSHCN experience significant stress but gain understanding, receive support, and develop the ability to care for and be advocates for their child through parent-to-parent emotional and informational social support. Online social support is most effective with young adults of childbearing age, with social media and apps being the most useful within the theoretical framework of social support. This opens new opportunities to effectively educate and support parents of young CSHCN. Providers seeking to inform, educate, and support families of CSHCN should develop strategies to help parents find and use social support through digital resources to facilitate their emotional adjustment and practical abilities to care for and access services for their child.

Indexed as

InternetSocial SupportAdaptation, PsychologicalAdultChildChild Health ServicesChildren with DisabilitiesFemaleHumansMaleParentsUnited Stateschilddisabilityearly childhoodfamilyhealth communicationhealth educationhealth resourcesmaternal-child health servicesneonatal intensive care unitsocial media

Identifiers

PMID28007689
PMCPMC5216258

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.