Cargando…
"Clicks, likes, shares and comments" a systematic review of breast cancer screening discourse in social media
BACKGROUND: Unsatisfactory participation rate at population based organised breast cancer screening is a long standing problem. Social media, with 3.2 billion users in 2019, is potentially an important site of breast cancer related discourse. Determining whether these platforms might be used as chan...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Public Library of Science
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7159232/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32294139 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0231422 |
_version_ | 1783522621778821120 |
---|---|
author | Döbrössy, Bence Girasek, Edmond Susánszky, Anna Koncz, Zsuzsa Győrffy, Zsuzsa Bognár, Virág Katalin |
author_facet | Döbrössy, Bence Girasek, Edmond Susánszky, Anna Koncz, Zsuzsa Győrffy, Zsuzsa Bognár, Virág Katalin |
author_sort | Döbrössy, Bence |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Unsatisfactory participation rate at population based organised breast cancer screening is a long standing problem. Social media, with 3.2 billion users in 2019, is potentially an important site of breast cancer related discourse. Determining whether these platforms might be used as channels by screening providers to reach under-screened women may have considerable public health significance. OBJECTIVES: By systematically reviewing original research studies on breast cancer related social media discourse, we had two aims: first, to assess the volume, participants and content of breast screening social media communication and second, to find out whether social media can be used by screening organisers as a channel of patient education. METHODS: We followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA). After searching PubMed, ScienceDirect, Web of Science, Springer and Ebsco, 17 studies were found that met our criteria. A systematic narrative framework was used for data synthesis. Owing to the high degree of heterogeneity in social media channels, outcomes and measurement included in this study, a meta-analytic approach was not appropriate. RESULTS: The volume of breast cancer related social media discourse is considerable. The majority of participants are lay individuals as opposed to healthcare professionals or advocacy groups. The lay misunderstandings surrounding the harms and benefits of mammography is well mirrored in the content of social media discourse. Although there is criticism, breast cancer screening sentiment on the social media ranges from the neutral to the positive. Social media is suitable for offering peer emotional support for potential participants. CONCLUSION: Dedicated breast screening websites operated by screening organisers would ensure much needed quality controlled information and also provide space for reliable question and answer forums, the sharing of personal experience and the provision of peer and professional support. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7159232 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | Public Library of Science |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-71592322020-04-22 "Clicks, likes, shares and comments" a systematic review of breast cancer screening discourse in social media Döbrössy, Bence Girasek, Edmond Susánszky, Anna Koncz, Zsuzsa Győrffy, Zsuzsa Bognár, Virág Katalin PLoS One Research Article BACKGROUND: Unsatisfactory participation rate at population based organised breast cancer screening is a long standing problem. Social media, with 3.2 billion users in 2019, is potentially an important site of breast cancer related discourse. Determining whether these platforms might be used as channels by screening providers to reach under-screened women may have considerable public health significance. OBJECTIVES: By systematically reviewing original research studies on breast cancer related social media discourse, we had two aims: first, to assess the volume, participants and content of breast screening social media communication and second, to find out whether social media can be used by screening organisers as a channel of patient education. METHODS: We followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA). After searching PubMed, ScienceDirect, Web of Science, Springer and Ebsco, 17 studies were found that met our criteria. A systematic narrative framework was used for data synthesis. Owing to the high degree of heterogeneity in social media channels, outcomes and measurement included in this study, a meta-analytic approach was not appropriate. RESULTS: The volume of breast cancer related social media discourse is considerable. The majority of participants are lay individuals as opposed to healthcare professionals or advocacy groups. The lay misunderstandings surrounding the harms and benefits of mammography is well mirrored in the content of social media discourse. Although there is criticism, breast cancer screening sentiment on the social media ranges from the neutral to the positive. Social media is suitable for offering peer emotional support for potential participants. CONCLUSION: Dedicated breast screening websites operated by screening organisers would ensure much needed quality controlled information and also provide space for reliable question and answer forums, the sharing of personal experience and the provision of peer and professional support. Public Library of Science 2020-04-15 /pmc/articles/PMC7159232/ /pubmed/32294139 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0231422 Text en © 2020 Döbrössy et al http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Döbrössy, Bence Girasek, Edmond Susánszky, Anna Koncz, Zsuzsa Győrffy, Zsuzsa Bognár, Virág Katalin "Clicks, likes, shares and comments" a systematic review of breast cancer screening discourse in social media |
title | "Clicks, likes, shares and comments" a systematic review of breast cancer screening discourse in social media |
title_full | "Clicks, likes, shares and comments" a systematic review of breast cancer screening discourse in social media |
title_fullStr | "Clicks, likes, shares and comments" a systematic review of breast cancer screening discourse in social media |
title_full_unstemmed | "Clicks, likes, shares and comments" a systematic review of breast cancer screening discourse in social media |
title_short | "Clicks, likes, shares and comments" a systematic review of breast cancer screening discourse in social media |
title_sort | "clicks, likes, shares and comments" a systematic review of breast cancer screening discourse in social media |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7159232/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32294139 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0231422 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT dobrossybence clickslikessharesandcommentsasystematicreviewofbreastcancerscreeningdiscourseinsocialmedia AT girasekedmond clickslikessharesandcommentsasystematicreviewofbreastcancerscreeningdiscourseinsocialmedia AT susanszkyanna clickslikessharesandcommentsasystematicreviewofbreastcancerscreeningdiscourseinsocialmedia AT konczzsuzsa clickslikessharesandcommentsasystematicreviewofbreastcancerscreeningdiscourseinsocialmedia AT gyorffyzsuzsa clickslikessharesandcommentsasystematicreviewofbreastcancerscreeningdiscourseinsocialmedia AT bognarviragkatalin clickslikessharesandcommentsasystematicreviewofbreastcancerscreeningdiscourseinsocialmedia |