ArticleBMC primary care2022
Using social media data in diabetes care: bridging the conceptual gap between health providers and the network population.
Article in BMC primary care, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Knowledge, Attitude, and Practice of Thrombolysis in Family Members of Cerebral Infarction Patients: Structural Equation Modeling Analysis.International journal of general medicine · 2026Article
- Nutritional myths in adolescents and young adults with type 1 diabetes: a pilot study.BMC nutrition · 2025Article
- Exploring the Needs and Preferences of Patients with Port-Wine Stain and Associated Syndromes: A Qualitative Analysis of Social Media Discussions.Patient preference and adherence · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPatients with diabetes who have poor health literacy about the disease may exhibit poor compliance and thus subsequently experience more complications. However, the conceptual gap of diabetes between health providers and the general population is still not well understood. Decoding concerns about diabetes on social media may help to close this gap.
methodsSocial media data were collected from the OpView social media platform. After checking the quality of the data, we analyzed the trends in people's discussions on the internet using text mining. The natural language process includes word segmentation, word counting and counting the relationships between the words. A word cloud was developed, and clustering analyses were performed.
resultsThere were 19,565 posts about diabetes collected from forums, community websites, and Q&A websites in the summer (June, July, and August) of 2017. The three most popular aspects of diabetes were diet (33.2%), life adjustment (21.2%), and avoiding complications (15.6%). Most discussions about diabetes were negative. The negative/positive ratios of the top three aspects were avoiding complications (7.60), problem solving (4.08), and exercise (3.97). In terms of diet, the most popular topics were Chinese medicine and special diet therapy. In terms of life adjustment, financial issues, weight reduction, and a less painful glucometer were discussed the most. Furthermore, sexual dysfunction, neuropathy, nephropathy, and retinopathy were the most worrisome issues in avoiding complications. Using text mining, we found that people care most about sexual dysfunction. Health providers care about the benefits of exercise in diabetes care, but people are mostly concerned about sexual functioning.
conclusionA conceptual gap between health providers and the network population existed in this real-world social media investigation. To spread healthy diabetic education concepts in the media, health providers might wish to provide more information related to the network population's actual areas of concern, such as sexual function, Chinese medicine, and weight reduction.
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.