ArticleFuture oncology (London, England)2026
Social media for healthcare professionals in oncology: results from a cross-sectional survey conducted across eight countries in Asia, Latin America, and the Middle East.
Article in Future oncology (London, England), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimsGuidance and regulation for the use of social media (SM) by healthcare professionals (HCPs) is lacking in some parts of the world. This paper explores the significance and barriers of SM in oncology care in regions beyond Europe and North America.
methodsA cross-sectional survey facilitated by Sermo to explore the use of SM among oncologists in Argentina, Brazil, India, Mexico, Saudi Arabia, Taiwan, Türkiye, and the United Arab Emirates was conducted between 14 June 2023 and 28 June 2023. A panel discussion involving seven digital opinion leaders (DOLs) was also held.
resultsOf 340 respondents, the survey found strong support for SM in public and HCP education with most preferring mobile phones and 88% accessing SM in their free time. SM has an average-to-great impact on the prescribing habits of 52% of respondents. Sixty-four percent of respondents are concerned about potential conflicts of interest with SM. The panel developed a framework of recommendations providing navigational aids for key information, verifying sources to avoid misinformation, disclosing conflicts of interests, and creating visual and bite-sized content.
conclusionOpportunities exist to enhance SM use in regions beyond Europe and North America. DOLs in oncology can enhance SM content quality.
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.