Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35188476›Full record

ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2022

Using Social Media to Engage Knowledge Users in Health Research Priority Setting: Scoping Review.

Surabhi Sivaratnam, Kyobin Hwang, Alyssandra Chee-A-Tow, Lily Ren, Geoffrey Fang, Lindsay Jibb

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article 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 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing 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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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

6 authors.

Surabhi SivaratnamMichael G Degroote School of Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-3960-0236
Kyobin HwangChild Health Evaluative Sciences, Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, ON, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-7000-2250
Alyssandra Chee-A-TowFaculty of Dentistry, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.ORCID 0000-0003-0220-2717
Lily RenLane Medical Library, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-6979-4182
Geoffrey FangFaculty of Applied Science and Engineering, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.ORCID 0000-0003-3877-184X
Lindsay JibbChild Health Evaluative Sciences, Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, ON, Canada.ORCID 0000-0001-6995-2825

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe need to include individuals with lived experience (ie, patients, family members, caregivers, researchers, and clinicians) in health research priority setting is becoming increasingly recognized. Social media-based methods represent a means to elicit and prioritize the research interests of such individuals, but there remains sparse methodological guidance on how best to conduct these social media efforts and assess their effectiveness.

objectiveThis review aims to identify social media strategies that enhance participation in priority-setting research, collate metrics assessing the effectiveness of social media campaigns, and summarize the benefits and limitations of social media-based research approaches, as well as recommendations for prospective campaigns.

methodsWe searched PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Scopus, and Web of Science from database inception until September 2021. Two reviewers independently screened all titles and abstracts, as well as full texts for studies that implemented and evaluated social media strategies aimed at engaging knowledge users in research priority setting. We subsequently conducted a thematic analysis to aggregate study data by related codes and themes.

resultsA total of 23 papers reporting on 22 unique studies were included. These studies used Facebook, Twitter, Reddit, websites, video-calling platforms, emails, blogs, e-newsletters, and web-based forums to engage with health research stakeholders. Priority-setting engagement strategies included paid platform-based advertisements, email-embedded survey links, and question-and-answer forums. Dissemination techniques for priority-setting surveys included snowball sampling and the circulation of participation opportunities via internal members' and external organizations' social media platforms. Social media campaign effectiveness was directly assessed as number of clicks and impressions on posts, frequency of viewed posts, volume of comments and replies, number of times individuals searched for a campaign page, and number of times a hashtag was used. Campaign effectiveness was indirectly assessed as numbers of priority-setting survey responses and visits to external survey administration sites. Recommendations to enhance engagement included the use of social media group moderators, opportunities for peer-to-peer interaction, and the establishment of a consistent tone and brand.

conclusionsSocial media may increase the speed and reach of priority-setting participation opportunities leading to the development of research agendas informed by patients, family caregivers, clinicians, and researchers. Perceived limitations of the approach include underrepresentation of certain demographic groups and addressing such limitations will enhance the inclusion of diverse research priority opinions in future research agendas.

Indexed as

HealthSocial MediaHumansKnowledgeResearchknowledge userresearch priority-settingscoping reviewsocial media

Identifiers

PMID35188476
PMCPMC8902657

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.