ArticleEcancermedicalscience2026
Navigating social networks in cancer care: a phenomenological exploration of patient experiences.
Article in Ecancermedicalscience, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Social networks (SNs) are increasingly shaping the landscape of cancer care by providing online platforms for information exchange, emotional support and patient engagement. However, the nuanced experiences of patients using these platforms, along with the associated risks and expectations, remain underexplored. This qualitative study aimed to investigate cancer patients' perspectives on the role of SNs throughout their care journey. Methods: A phenomenological design was employed in 2024, involving 20 cancer patients who were active users of SNs. Participants were purposively selected from hospitals affiliated with Urmia University of Medical Sciences, Iran. Data were collected through semi-structured interviews focusing on three main areas: perceived opportunities, challenges and expectations. Thematic analysis was conducted following Braun and Clarke's six-phase framework. Results: Findings are presented within three main categories derived from the interview guide: opportunities, challenges and expectations. Thematic analysis revealed several key subthemes under each category. Opportunities included enhanced cancer awareness, improved communication with healthcare providers, emotional support and self-care promotion. Challenges encompassed misinformation, privacy breaches, emotional distress, social isolation and commercial exploitation. Expectations included greater provider engagement as well as improved access to reliable treatment information and social support. Conclusion: Findings highlight that while SNs offer meaningful benefits in cancer care, they also pose substantial risks. To maximise their utility and minimise harm, these platforms must prioritise content accuracy, user privacy and clinical collaboration. To be effective in health contexts, SNs should specifically address health-related issues.
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.