ArticleF1000Research2026
The Institutional Black Box of Friction Between Digital Agility Demands and Clinical Bureaucracy in Hospital Social Media Management.
Article in F1000Research, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: In the contemporary healthcare landscape, hospitals face a paradox between the need for digitally agile, emotionally engaging communication and the rigid, risk-averse nature of clinical bureaucracy. While social media enables narrative-based engagement, its implementation in hospitals remains constrained. This study aims to examine how institutional dynamics shape the implementation of narrative content and to explain the gap between audience engagement and observable electronic word-of-mouth (e-WOM). Methods: This study employs a qualitative approach using Directed Qualitative Content Analysis (DQCA). Data were collected through in-depth stimulated recall interviews with hospital audiences and internal management, and analyzed using ATLAS.ti to identify thematic patterns related to institutional constraints, content implementation, and audience responses. Findings: The findings reveal two key mechanisms. First, narrative content is constrained by institutional logics and bureaucratic processes, particularly approval bottlenecks, resulting in delayed, modified, or diluted implementation. Second, although narrative content generates high affective audience engagement, this does not consistently translate into public e-WOM. This engagement-behavior gap is explained by the role of dark social, where content is shared through private channels due to privacy concerns, social norms, and perceived risks. Conclusions: This study contributes by proposing a conceptual framework of institutional friction and introducing a practical Quality Control (QC) checklist to support the implementation of narrative content in hospital settings. The findings highlight the need to align communication strategies with institutional realities while recognizing that conventional metrics may underestimate the true impact of digital engagement due to the prevalence of dark social.
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.