Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35180264›Full record

ArticlePloS one2022

Nurses' use of social media during the COVID-19 pandemic-A scoping review.

Stinne Glasdam, Helena Sandberg, Sigrid Stjernswärd, Frode F Jacobsen, Anette H Grønning, Lisbeth Hybholt

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Social Media Misinformation about Pregnancy and COVID-19 Vaccines: A Systematic Review.Medical principles and practice : international journal of the Kuwait University, Health Science Centre · 2024
    Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Psychosocial Risks among Quebec Healthcare Workers during the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Social Media Analysis.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
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

6 authors.

Stinne GlasdamDepartment of Health Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, Lund University, Lund, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0002-0893-3054
Helena SandbergMedia and Communication Studies, School of Health and Welfare, Halmstad University, Halmstad, Sweden.
Sigrid StjernswärdDepartment of Health Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, Lund University, Lund, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0002-7152-9206
Frode F JacobsenCentre for Care Research Western Norway, Western Norway University of Applied Services Bergen, Bergen, Norway.ORCID 0000-0002-9395-2574
Anette H GrønningMedia Studies, Department for the Study of Culture, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark.
Lisbeth HybholtCentre for Relationships and De-escalation, Mental Health Services Region Zealand, Slagelse, Denmark.ORCID 0000-0002-9764-8940

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDuring the COVID-19 pandemic, nurses stand in an unknown situation while facing continuous news feeds. Social media is a ubiquitous tool to gain and share reliable knowledge and experiences regarding COVID-19. The article aims to explore how nurses use social media in relation to the COVID-19 pandemic.

methodA scoping review inspired by Arksey and O'Mally was conducted by searches in Medline, CINAHL, Academic Search Complete and Web of Sciences. Empirical research studies investigating nurses' use of social media in relation to COVID-19 were included. Exclusion criteria were: Literature reviews, articles in languages other than English, articles about E-health, and articles investigating healthcare professionals without specification of nurses included. Articles, published in January-November 2020, were included and analysed through a thematic analysis. The PRISMA-ScR checklist was used.

resultsMost of the eleven included studies were cross-sectional surveys, conducted in developing countries, and had neither social media nor nurses as their main focus of interest. Three themes were identified: 'Social media as a knowledge node', 'Social media functioned as profession-promoting channels' and 'Social media as a disciplinary tool'. Nurses used social media as channels to gain and share information about COVID-19, and to support each other by highlighting the need for training and changes in delivery of care and redeployment. Further, social media functioned as profession-promoting channels partly sharing heroic self-representations and acknowledgment of frontline persons in the pandemic, partly by displaying critical working conditions. Finally, nurses used social media to educate people to perform the 'right 'COVID-19' behaviours in society.

conclusionThis review provided snapshots of nurses' uses of social media from various regions in the world, but revealed a need for studies from further countries and continents. The study calls for further multi-methodological and in depth qualitative research, including theoretically framed studies, with a specific focus on the uses of social media among nurses during the pandemic.

Indexed as

COVID-19Cross-Sectional StudiesHumansInformation DisseminationNursesPandemicsProfessional RoleSocial MediaSocial Support

Identifiers

PMID35180264
PMCPMC8856556

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.