Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34994706›Full record

ReviewJournal of medical Internet research2022

Social Media and Health Care (Part II): Narrative Review of Social Media Use by Patients.

Deema Farsi, Hector R Martinez-Menchaca, Mohammad Ahmed, Nada Farsi

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of medical Internet research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 38 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
38citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

38 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Observational
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Patient Perceptions of Hypoglossal Nerve Stimulation on Social Media.Laryngoscope investigative otolaryngology · 2025
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Observational
  19. Article
  20. Understanding social media discourse on antidepressants: unsupervised and sentiment analysis using X.European psychiatry : the journal of the Association of European Psychiatrists · 2025
    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.

Deema FarsiDepartment of Pediatric Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia.ORCID 0000-0003-1371-913X
Hector R Martinez-MenchacaDepartment of Comprehensive Dentistry, School of Dentistry, University of Louisville, Louisville, KY, United States.ORCID 0000-0001-8861-4418
Mohammad AhmedDubai Health Authority, Dubai, United Arab Emirates.ORCID 0000-0002-3047-4894
Nada FarsiDepartment of Dental Public Health, Faculty of Dentistry, King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia.ORCID 0000-0001-8762-2467

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPeople are now connected in a borderless web-based world. The modern public, especially the younger generation, relies heavily on the internet as the main source of health-related information. In health care, patients can use social media for more tailored uses such as telemedicine, finding a provider, and for peer support.

objectiveThe aim of this narrative review is to discuss how social media has been used in the health care industry from the perspective of patients and describe the main issues surrounding its use in health care.

methodsBetween March and June 2020, a review of the literature was conducted on PubMed, Google Scholar, and Web of Science for English studies that were published since 2007 and discussed the use of social media in health care. In addition to only English publications that discussed the use of social media by patients, publications pertaining to ethical and legal considerations in the use of social media were included. The studies were then categorized as health information, telemedicine, finding a health care provider, peer support and sharing experiences, and influencing positive health behavior. In addition, two more sections were added to the review: issues pertaining to social media use in health care and ethical considerations.

resultsInitially, 75 studies were included. As the study proceeded, more studies were included, and a total of 91 studies were reviewed, complemented by 1 textbook chapter and 13 web references. Approximately half of the studies were reviews. The first study was published in 2009, and the last was published in 2021, with more than half of the studies published in the last 5 years. The studies were mostly from the United States (n=40), followed by Europe (n=13), and the least from India (n=1). WhatsApp or WeChat was the most investigated social media platform.

conclusionsSocial media can be used by the public and patients to improve their health and knowledge. However, due diligence must be practiced to assess the credibility of the information obtained and its source. Health care providers, patients, and the public need not forget the risks associated with the use of social media. The limitations and shortcomings of the use of social media by patients should be understood.

Indexed as

Social MediaTelemedicineBehavior TherapyDelivery of Health CareHealth PersonnelHumansCOVID-19health careinternetmobile phonepatientsocial mediasocial networkingtelemedicine

Identifiers

PMID34994706
PMCPMC8783277

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.