ReviewFrontiers in psychology2020
Are Health e-Mavens the New Patient Influencers?
Review in Frontiers in psychology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Persuasive differences between human and virtual influencers in health supplement advertising: evidence from eye-tracking.Frontiers in psychology · 2025Article
- Inflammatory Bowel Disease and X (Formerly Twitter) Influencers: Who Are They and What Do They Say?Cureus · 2023Article
- TikTok and Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder: A Cross-Sectional Study of Social Media Content Quality.Canadian journal of psychiatry. Revue canadienne de psychiatrie · 2022Article
- Modifying UTAUT2 for a cross-country comparison of telemedicine adoption.Computers in human behavior · 2022Article
- Using social media influencers to increase knowledge and positive attitudes toward the flu vaccine.PloS one · 2020Article
- A social media microinfluencer intervention to reduce coronavirus disease 2019 vaccine hesitancy in underserved Tennessee communities: A protocol paper.Journal of the American Pharmacists Association : JAPhAArticle
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
Even though the healthcare industry is usually considered a rather traditional and slowly evolving sector, change is happening. Digitalization is transforming the way of obtaining medical advice and treatment and the Internet has become a key source for the seeking of healthcare information. It has allowed people to turn into more active collaborators in matters of their own health by enabling them to easily search and share information with other patients. Although research points out the growing importance of user-generated content in many sectors and its positive impact on information credibility, trust, engagement, and, ultimately, customer behavior (Malthouse et al., 2016), there is a lack of attention to this topic in healthcare. In this brief review, we address this gap by analyzing the role of health e-mavens, which are a particular type of influencers that possesses both expertise and online social influence. We lastly illustrate possible benefits of their impact on other to the different parties involved and affected by this phenomenon.
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.