| Literature DB >> 27134699 |
Frances Griffiths, Tim Dobermann, Jonathan A K Cave, Margaret Thorogood, Samantha Johnson, Kavé Salamatian, Francis X Gomez Olive, Jane Goudge.
Abstract
Interaction through online social networks potentially results in the contestation of prevailing ideas about health and health care, and to mass protest where health is put at risk or health care provision is wanting. Through a review of the academic literature and case studies of four social networking health sites (PatientsLikeMe, Mumsnet, Treatment Action Campaign, and My Pro Ana), we establish the extent to which this phenomenon is documented, seek evidence of the prevalence and character of health-related networks, and explore their structure, function, participants, and impact, seeking to understand how they came into being and how they sustain themselves. Results indicate mass protest is not arising from these established health-related networking platforms. There is evidence of changes in policy following campaigning activity prompted by experiences shared through social networking such as improved National Health Service care for miscarriage (a Mumsnet campaign). Platform owners and managers have considerable power to shape these campaigns. Social networking is also influencing health policy indirectly through increasing awareness and so demand for health care. Transient social networking about health on platforms such as Twitter were not included as case studies but may be where the most radical or destabilizing influence on health care policy might arise.Entities:
Keywords: digital communication; health; health care; interest group; pressure group; self‐help group; social media; social networks
Year: 2015 PMID: 27134699 PMCID: PMC4841174 DOI: 10.1002/poi3.97
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Policy Internet ISSN: 1944-2866
Definitions of the Characteristics of Social Networking Health Information Sites
| Components | |
|---|---|
| Personal profiles | Users have an individual page that can display personal details, interests, friends, photos, likes, etc. This is customizable and the amount of information available to the public is typically user‐defined. |
| Videos and multimedia | Network has permanently embedded videos or multimedia, which serves to inform or provide emotional support. |
| Ask an expert | Participants are able to directly contact medical professionals with their health‐related questions through the network website. |
| Discussion forum | A list of discussion threads, which are user‐generated and in which other users can post replies or comments. Discussion forums are often separated into subgroups or categories (e.g., for specific conditions). In some instances, forums are moderated by professionals. |
| Blog (expert) | Network hosts articles or blog posts written by medical professionals. This can be to provide either information or advice/tips to users. |
| Blog/journal (participant) | Users can post their own blog (journal) entries, which are visible to others. Typically, these involve personal reflections, experiences, or advice for others who may read the entries. |
| Posts/comments | To be distinguished from discussion forums. Posts or statuses are similar in nature to threads but are not structured or categorized by the network owner. They are typically added to a “stream” of other posts made by other users. |
| Chat/private messaging | Participants within the network have the ability to send private messages (emails), which are only visible to the two interacting parties. |
| Dimensions | |
| Dissemination of information | A central aim of the network is the dissemination of established information or advice to users. This may be through permanent text or multimedia, expert contributions through guest articles or blogs, or references to other sources of information. |
| Collection, collation, and correction of information | To be distinguished from the dissemination of information. This explicitly touches on the emergence (“collection” or “collation”) of information, which is derived from network activity and user contributions within the network. |
| Emotional support | Classifies networks, which embed elements that support user exchanges of experiences, personal advice, or any other function which serves to promote emotional well‐being. |
| Campaigning | Through the network, users are active in setting political goals or creating social movements around health issues. Critically, these actions are founded through collective action within the particular network (initiation can be both by owners and users of the network). |
| Fundraising | The network clearly integrates options for participants to donate or raise money for health‐related causes that are not concerned with the maintenance and operation of the physical network, for example, links or built‐in platforms to donate for charity research. |
| Network formation | |
| Medical professional | Network founded by an experienced medical practitioner or “health expert.” |
| Managerial professional | Network created by an individual with managerial, technical, commercial, or other expertise but which is not associated with expert health knowledge. |
| Lay | Network formed by individuals who do not possess professional skills that would otherwise be associated with the previous categories. Often these individuals are patients or close to other individuals who have gone through or live with a health condition. |
| Network character | |
| Visible network | In networks where users are able to form connections (see below), a visible network means that the social network of each user (for instance the people they follow or friends they have) is visible to other users. Applying this to a macro scale, the list of participants of the network is visible to others. |
| Subnetwork | This refers to health networks that are embedded within larger, nonhealth‐related social networks, for example, a Facebook group dedicated to raising awareness of cancer. |
| Formation of connections | Users are able to create “physical” links or ties to other participants within the network. Typically, the formation of a link with another user results in greater sharing of information between the two individuals. |
| Anonymity | Anonymity captures the extent to which participants can remain anonymous or conceal personal information about themselves. In almost all cases, this is user‐defined: there is an element of choice over how much personal information a user wishes to disclose. Within this characteristic, there are three subclassifications (low, medium, high) which are assigned based on the total amount of information which can potentially be displayed about a user (if they choose to do so). |
| Accessibility | Accessibility is broken down into the following: (i) the restrictions in place which prevent individuals viewing content on the network, and (ii) restrictions on whether an individual can participate within the network. |
| Memory | The memory of a network refers to the length of time content is visible in the network. Transient networks (those with very short memories) rapidly update content, with older content pushed down. Within this characterization, permanent memory refers to information or content that is controlled by the owner of the network. In various settings, the memory of a particular piece of content can be influence by user activity (more posts on a discussion thread make it more visible and last longer). |
| Moderation | Moderation refers to the filtering of user‐created content in the network. This is often done by network owners or experienced users to ensure behavioral guidelines and etiquette are upheld and to prevent the spread of misinformation. |
| Expert research | This characteristic refers to the use of information derived from activity within the particular network by professionals for research purposes, with the intention of using this information to enhance the experience of users. |
Characteristics of Health‐Related Social Networks
Figure 1The Case Study Selection Process.
Summary of Case Study Findings for Each Proposition
| Proposition | PatientsLikeMe | Mumsnet | TAC | My Pro Ana |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| The structure and function of the social network site impacts on usage and ultimately on sustainability. | Yes. “Virtuous cycle”: high quality user experience and relevant personalized feedback—high volume users providing data—commercially viable | Yes. High quality user experience with relevant information, high user numbers, sustainable as commercial venture. | No. Structure of the website is largely static. The social network is largely sustained by interaction beyond the website. | Yes. Anonymity and ease of interaction (discussion threads) promote activity (Gavin, Rodham, & Poyer, |
| The explicit purpose of the site influences the content of social network activity but does not completely limit it (i.e., side conversations can erupt.) | No. Purpose directs and completely constrains activity. No facility for side conversations. | Yes. There is no evidence that conversations not relevant to Mumsnet's aims are removed. | N/A (no direct social network activity) | Yes. The stated purpose (supporting for those experiencing eating disorders) frames the discussion, but a central focus (proliferation of eating disorders as implied by the name Pro Ana) is not limited by site's explicit purpose. |
| Volume of traffic (in general on a specific health issue) of social network sites will determine its impact on health/health care. | Potentially yes. Claim that the high volume data will enable medical innovation to improve health (Frost et al., | Yes. Evidence that Mumsnet monitors both volume and content of posts to decide on political campaigns, future content and advertising. | Yes, albeit volume refers to on‐the‐ground activity. This is because TAC is largely a political / campaigning oriented network which requires high involvement and awareness to be successful. | Yes but only via individual behaviors. The activity on the site seems to encourage individuals in behaviors that arguably go against mainstream health care (Boero & Pascoe, |
| The nature of the health condition discussed through social network influences the nature of the social network activity (sustained use by stable community of members, people coming and going rapidly.) | Social network activity is constrained by the design of the site—peer‐to‐peer sharing is indirect. | Yes. The social network activity on the site and its topic (being a parent) both touch on all aspects of life (Pedersen & Smithson, | TAC initially formed through networked groups of HIV/AIDS activists. Large issues—social stigmatization and medicine costs—attributed with HIV/AIDS influenced network campaigning activity (Grebe, | Yes. The topic (eating disorders, with specific emphasis on supporting pro‐anorexia) attracts a specific type of user. This type of user is more likely to represent an unorthodox view over the health issue, but one which forms consensus within the network itself (Boero & Pascoe, |
| The presence of moderators or established active/expert/respected users influences the impact of social network on individual health but can limit its potential for challenging prevailing norms and knowledge. | No moderators or established experts except via ‘Crisis’ section which provides hotline for users. | Yes: several channels for “experts” to influence individual health/well‐being. There are challenges to prevailing norms through the Mumsnet campaigns. | N/A | Unlikely. There is network moderation of discussion threads, but most conversations seem to flow freely. The website claims only to filter out spam or unrelated content. It makes no claim on the role moderation plays in ensuring the medical accuracy or legitimacy of statements made within the network. |
| Social networks do influence service provision and health care policy | No evidence of any direct influence on service provision and health care policy | Some evidence of successful campaigns related to maternal and child well‐being | Campaigning influences which services should be prioritized or improved. | The controversial nature of the content on such websites has prompted movements to establish policies aimed at banning such networks or limiting their online presence (Chesley, Alberts, Klein, & Kreipe, |
| Condition‐specific content maintains a focus on individual gains from social network and limits the likelihood of the social network influencing community issues such as service provision. | For users, the content and structure of site limits gains to individual gains. Influence on service provision is potentially possible but only indirectly via commercial companies buying the data and using it for innovation in health care. | The main focus is on individual gains from the social network. However, the campaigns that are taken up by Mumsnet do seem to be on issues identified in posts to the site but with active monitoring and some intervention from site owners. Mumsnet members also take on campaigns and report on them through Mumsnet. | No. Purpose is improving community provision of treatments. | Yes. Focus is on an individual experience or issue, with the end or outcome being personal emotional relief. |
| Geographically, local networks are more likely to develop campaigns in relation to community issues such as service provision. | No facility on site that would enable development of campaigns. | This is a U.K. network. Mumsnet campaigns are U.K. centered (although their “guest campaigns” may be international—text and links provided for users). | Yes. Targets local issues by bringing together users within a specific locality (sub‐communities in South Africa) | No. The network is not local and appears to attract users from a variety of different countries (Alexa Internet, |
| Lay controlled networks that lack professional managerial expertise are not sustained. | Yes. This site has professional managerial expertise and is sustained. | Yes. This site has professional managerial expertise and is sustained | Yes. TAC has functioned as a large activist organization, which has enabled it to have a much wider impact and sustain itself as a leading campaigning body in South Africa. | Conflicting evidence exists. Niche conditions lead to such networks forming tight lay communities with network‐specific traits which are sustained (Adler & Adler, |
| As social networks mature they become integrated into the real world network of established social structures (industry/health providers/governments/community and advocacy groups, etc.) and take on attributes and activities of those social structures which have similar purpose. | Little integration with established social structures for provision of understanding of the experience of illness and treatment except the provision of a crisis hot line. | Yes. Campaigns, social networking, and commercial aspects are all integrated with real world network of established social structures. | To be seen. Almost the reverse direction: TAC has emerged out of established social structures into a social network. | No. Socially sensitive and stigmatized conditions such as pro‐anorexia are unlikely to influence or mature to affect real world networks as participation and involvement is held quite secretive (Gavin et al., |
| Yes. This site has become integrated with health‐related industry for the production of innovation in health care. Although providing a novel data collection conduit, the activity of collecting data about what happens as disease progresses and treatments tried is conceptually similar to medical research activities. |