ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2022
Ophthalmology Practice and Social Media Influences: A Patients Based Cross-Sectional Study among Social Media Users.
Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Article
- [Ophthalmology online : Representation of the discipline ophthalmology on instagram].Die Ophthalmologie · 2025Article
- Influence of digital health literacy on online health-related behaviors influenced by internet advertising.BMC public health · 2024Article
- Patient Perception and Self-Reported Outcomes with Presbyopia-Correcting Intraocular Lenses (PCIOLs): A Social Media Listening Study.Ophthalmology and therapy · 2024Article
- Changes in emergency glaucoma care during the COVID-19 pandemic in South India.Indian journal of ophthalmology · 2023Article
- Public and Physicians Perception of Oculoplastic Surgery Subspecialty in Saudi Arabia.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Many physicians consider social media a good tool for building their brands and attracting patients. However, limited data exist on patients' perceptions of the value of social media in ophthalmology. Therefore, our objective was to examine how social media influences patients when choosing an ophthalmologist among social media users, and people's behaviors toward ophthalmologists' social media accounts. This was a cross-sectional study including 1086 participants. Males represented 77.3% of the sample. The majority of the participants (71.3%) were aged between 25 and 54 years. Regarding social media sites frequently checked, Twitter ranked first (75.3%), followed by Snapchat (52.8%) and YouTube (48.7%). The majority (92.3%) used social media sites at all times of the day. Concerning the importance of ophthalmologists' social media sites, around 36.3% considered it either very or extremely important. As regards the important factors about an ophthalmologist's social media site from participants' perspectives, medical information written by the ophthalmologist (45.5%) and recommendations by friends (45.4%) were the most common reasons. Around 21% of females, compared to 16.8% of males, perceived the ophthalmologists' social media sites as extremely important,
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.