Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29592845›Full record

SynthesisJournal of medical Internet research2018

Use of Social Network Sites for Communication Among Health Professionals: Systematic Review.

Windy Sy Chan, Angela Ym Leung

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of medical Internet research, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 67 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
67citing papers in PubMed
–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

67 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Observational
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2025
    Article
  12. Article
  13. From Engagement to Concerns: Social Media Use Among a Sample of Australian Public Health Professionals.Health promotion journal of Australia : official journal of Australian Association of Health Promotion Professionals · 2025
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

7 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.

Windy Sy Chan *School of Health Sciences, Caritas Institute of Higher Education, New Territories, China (Hong Kong).ORCID 0000-0002-1180-638X
Angela Ym Leung *Centre for Gerontological Nursing, School of Nursing, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hung Hom, Kowloon, China (Hong Kong).ORCID 0000-0002-9836-1925

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAlthough much research has been done investigating the roles of social network sites (SNSs) in linking patients and health professionals, there is a lack of information about their uses, benefits, and limitations in connecting health professions only for professional communication.

objectiveThis review aimed to examine the utilization of SNSs for communication among health professionals in (1) frontline clinical practice, (2) professional networks, and (3) education and training to identify areas for future health communication research.

methodsThis review followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines. A systematic search of the literature published in the last 10 years (January 1, 2007, to March 1, 2017) was performed in March 2017, using the following electronic databases: MEDLINE via OvidSP, EMBASE, CINAHL Complete, and InfoSci-Journals. The searches were conducted using the following defined search terms: "social media" OR "social network" OR "social network site" OR "Facebook" OR "Twitter" OR "Linkedin" OR "Instagram" OR "Weibo" OR "Whatsapp" OR "Telegram" OR "WeChat" AND "health" OR "health profession."

resultsOf the 6977 papers retrieved, a total of 33 studies were included in this review. They were exploratory in nature, and the majority used surveys (n=25) and interviews (n=6). All retrieved studies stated that SNSs enhanced effective communication and information sharing. SNSs were used for supporting delivering of clinical services, making referrals, and sharing information. They were beneficial to network building and professional collaboration. SNSs were novel tools to enhance educational interactions among peers, students, instructors, and preceptors. The application of SNSs came with restraints in technical knowledge, concerns on data protection, privacy and liability, issues in professionalism, and data protection.

conclusionsSNSs provide platforms facilitating efficient communication, interactions, and connections among health professionals in frontline clinical practice, professional networks, education, and training with limitations identified as technical knowledge, professionalism, and risks of data protection. The evolving use of SNSs necessitates robust research to explore the full potential and the relative effectiveness of SNSs in professional communication.

Indexed as

Social NetworkingFemaleHealth CommunicationHealth PersonnelHumansMaleProfessionalismSocial MediaSurveys and QuestionnairesFacebookhealth communicationhealth professionalsprofessional networksocial mediasocial networkingWhatsApp

Identifiers

PMID29592845
PMCPMC5895921

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.