ArticleOTO open
An Exploratory Analysis of the Chronic Rhinosinusitis Online Support Community.
Article in OTO open. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To characterize the users of the largest chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) online support communities (OSCs), describe the perceived benefits of OSCs for their users, and understand how patient medical decision making is affected by membership in OSCs. Study Design: Cross-sectional online survey. Setting: Online. Methods: A cross-sectional online survey was adapted from the existing literature on patient support groups and modified for CRS patients. The survey was posted on multiple Facebook/Reddit groups aimed at providing support toward patients with CRS. Survey data was collected over 3 months and analyzed thereafter. Results: There were 127 total participants. The majority were female (65.35%), white (76.98%), and the median age was 38 years. Just under half of patients had nasal polyps (48.67%) and 54.54% had undergone surgery. Many participants (69.42%) reported engaging in the OSC at least multiple times per month. The most common reason for joining an OSC was to learn tips on how to manage CRS (89.7%) and the most achieved goal from membership was hearing from others undergoing a similar experience (79.5%). Involvement in an OSC impacted knowledge of CRS in 87.41% of participants. Most users (81.1%) would recommend membership in an OSC and 54.33% reported the OSC influenced their medical decision-making. Conclusion: A majority of patients with CRS who frequently engage in an OSC for CRS have a positive experience. OSCs are a resource that CRS patients utilize to manage their disease.
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.