domingo, 8 de febrero de 2015

Preventing Chronic Disease | Social Media in Communicating Health Information: An Analysis of Facebook Groups Related to Hypertension - CDC

full-text ►

Preventing Chronic Disease | Social Media in Communicating Health Information: An Analysis of Facebook Groups Related to Hypertension - CDC



Preventing Chronic Disease Logo



Social Media in Communicating Health Information: An Analysis of Facebook Groups Related to Hypertension

Navigate This Article

Mohammad Al Mamun, MBBS, MPH; Hamza M. Ibrahim, MBBS, MPH, MD; Tanvir Chowdhury Turin, MBBS, MS, PhD

Suggested citation for this article: Al Mamun M, Ibrahim HM, Turin TC. Social Media in Communicating Health Information: An Analysis of Facebook Groups Related to Hypertension. Prev Chronic Dis 2015;12:140265. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5888/pcd12.140265External Web Site Icon.
PEER REVIEWED

Abstract

Introduction
We studied Facebook groups related to hypertension to characterize their objectives, subject matter, member sizes, geographical boundaries, level of activity, and user-generated content.
Methods
We performed a systematic search among open Facebook groups using the keywords “hypertension,” “high blood pressure,” “raised blood pressure,” and “blood pressure.” We extracted relevant data from each group’s content and developed a coding and categorizing scheme for the whole data set. Stepwise logistic regression was used to explore factors independently associated with each group’s level of activity.
Results
We found 187 hypertension-related Facebook groups containing 8,966 members. The main objective of most (59.9%) Facebook groups was to create hypertension awareness, and 11.2% were created primarily to support patients and caregivers. Among the top-displayed, most recent posts (n = 164), 21.3% were focused on product or service promotion, whereas one-fifth of posts were related to hypertension-awareness information. Each Facebook group’s level of activity was independently associated with group size (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 1.02; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.01–1.03), presence of “likes” on the most recent wall post (AOR, 3.55, 95% CI, 1.41–8.92), and presence of attached files on the group wall (AOR, 5.01, 95% CI, 1.25–20.1).
Conclusion
The primary objective of most of the hypertension-related Facebook groups observed in this study was awareness creation. Compared with the whole Facebook community, the total number of hypertension-related Facebook groups and their users was small and the groups were less active.

Acknowledgments

No financial support was received for this research. This paper was presented in an international conference titled “Geneva Health Forum – 2014” held in Geneva, Switzerland, April 15–17, 2014.
Top of Page

Author Information

Corresponding Author: Mohammad Al Mamun, MBBS, MPH, Public Health Specialist Physician, Department of Public Health, General Directorate of Health Affairs in Tabuk Region, Ministry of Health, P.O. Box 16673, Tabuk-71474, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Telephone: +966 14 4225333, Ext: 546. E-mail:doctor.mamun@gmail.com.
Author Affiliations: Hamza M. Ibrahim, Department of Public Health, General Directorate of Health Affairs in Tabuk Region, Ministry of Health, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia; Tanvir Chowdhury Turin, Department of Family Medicine, University of Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
Top of Page

References

  1. Cohen RA, Adams PF. Use of the Internet for Health Information: United States, 2009. Hyattsville (MD): National Center for Health Statistics; 2011. http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/databriefs/db66.htm. Accessed March 2, 2014.
  2. Cline RJ, Haynes KM. Consumer health information seeking on the Internet: the state of the art. Health Educ Res 2001;16(6):671–92. CrossRefExternal Web Site Icon PubMedExternal Web Site Icon
  3. Bender JL, Jimenez-Marroquin MC, Jadad AR. Seeking support on Facebook: a content analysis of breast cancer groups. J Med Internet Res 2011;13(1):e16.CrossRefExternal Web Site Icon PubMedExternal Web Site Icon
  4. Logan AG. Community hypertension programs in the age of mobile technology and social media. Am J Hypertens 2014;27(8):1033–5. CrossRefExternal Web Site Icon PubMedExternal Web Site Icon
  5. Greene JA, Choudhry NK, Kilabuk E, Shrank WH. Online social networking by patients with diabetes: a qualitative evaluation of communication with Facebook. J Gen Intern Med 2011;26(3):287–92. CrossRefExternal Web Site Icon PubMedExternal Web Site Icon
  6. Ahlqvist T, Bäck A, Halonen M, Heinonen S. Social media roadmaps: exploring the futures triggered by social media. Vuorimiehentie (FI): VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland; 2008.
  7. Agichtein E, Castillo C, Donato D, Gionis A, Mishne G. Finding high-quality content in social media. Conference paper from the First ACM International Conference on Web Search and Data Mining (WSDM 2008). 2008 Feb 11-12; Stanford, USA. http://www.mathcs.emory.edu/~eugene/papers/wsdm2008quality.pdf. Accessed December 15, 2014.
  8. Yahoo News. Number of active users at Facebook over the years; 2013. http://news.yahoo.com/number-active-users-facebook-over-230449748.html. Accessed October 5, 2013.
  9. Fowler GA. Facebook: one billion and counting. The Wall Street Journal. 2012 October 04. http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10000872396390443635404578036164027386112. Accessed December 9, 2014.
  10. Kiss J. Facebook's 10th birthday: from college dorm to 1.23 billion users. The Guardian 2014 February 04. http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/feb/04/facebook-10-years-mark-zuckerberg. Accessed December 10, 2014.
  11. World Health Organization. A global brief on hypertension: silent killer, global public health crisis. Geneva (CH): World Health Organization; 2013.
  12. Turin TC, Murakami Y, Miura K, Rumana N, Kita Y, Hayakawa T, et al. Hypertension and life expectancy among Japanese: NIPPON DATA80. Hypertens Res 2012;35(9):954–8. CrossRefExternal Web Site Icon PubMedExternal Web Site Icon
  13. Kearney PM, Whelton M, Reynolds K, Muntner P, Whelton PK, He J. Global burden of hypertension: analysis of worldwide data. Lancet 2005;365(9455):217–23. CrossRefExternal Web Site Icon PubMedExternal Web Site Icon
  14. Pew Research Center. The diagnosis difference; 2013. http://www.pewinternet.org/files/old-media/Files/Reports/2013/PewResearch_DiagnosisDifference.pdf. Accessed September 28, 2014.
  15. De la Torre-Díez I, Diaz-Pernas FJ, Antón-Rodriguez M. A content analysis of chronic diseases social groups on Facebook and Twitter. Telemed J E Health 2012;18(6):404–8. CrossRefExternal Web Site Icon PubMedExternal Web Site Icon
  16. Zhang Y, He D, Sang Y. Facebook as a platform for health information and communication: a case study of a diabetes group. J Med Syst 2013;37(3):9942.CrossRefExternal Web Site Icon PubMedExternal Web Site Icon
  17. Farmer AD, Bruckner Holt CE, Cook MJ, Hearing SD. Social networking sites: a novel portal for communication. Postgrad Med J 2009;85(1007):455–9.CrossRefExternal Web Site Icon PubMedExternal Web Site Icon
  18. Rossotti R, Gabrielli E, Gervasoni C, Rosso R, Sabbatini F, Uglietti A, et al. HIV education and counselling using Facebook: a possible new approach. J Telemed Telecare 2012;18(4):239–40. CrossRefExternal Web Site Icon PubMedExternal Web Site Icon
  19. Hawn C. Take two aspirin and tweet me in the morning: how Twitter, Facebook, and other social media are reshaping health care. Health Aff (Millwood) 2009;28(2):361–8. CrossRefExternal Web Site Icon PubMedExternal Web Site Icon
  20. Pineda N. Facebook tips: what’s the difference between a Facebook page and group? Facebook; 2010. https://www.facebook.com/notes/facebook/facebook-tips-whats-the-difference-between-a-facebook-page-and-group/324706977130. Accessed September 25, 2014.
  21. Krippendorff K. Content analysis: an introduction to its methodology. 2nd ed. California: SAGE Publications; 2004.
  22. Bernard HR. Research methods in anthropology: qualitative and quantitative approaches. 4th ed. Lanham: AltaMira Press; 2006.
  23. Rourke L, Anderson T, Garrison DR, Archer W. Methodological issues in the content analysis of computer conference transcripts. Int J Artif Intell Educ 2001;12:8–22.
  24. Hosmer DW, Lemeshow S. Applied logistic regression. 2nd ed. New York: John Wiley & Sons; 2000.
  25. Hefler M, Freeman B, Chapman S. Tobacco control advocacy in the age of social media: using Facebook, Twitter and change. Tob Control 2013;22(3):210–4.CrossRefExternal Web Site Icon PubMedExternal Web Site Icon
  26. Dennen VP. Pedagogical lurking: student engagement in non-posting discussion behavior. Comput Human Behav 2008;24(4):1624–33. CrossRefExternal Web Site Icon
  27. Nielsen J. Participation inequality: encouraging more users to contribute. Nielsen Norman Group; 2006. http://www.nngroup.com/articles/participation-inequality/. Accessed April 3, 2014.
  28. Kumar N, Pandey A, Venkatraman A, Garg N. Are video sharing web sites a useful source of information on hypertension? J Am Soc Hypertens 2014;8(7):481–90. CrossRefExternal Web Site Icon PubMedExternal Web Site Icon
  29. Ovaskainen H. Internet pharmacies: advantages and risks. WHO Drug Information. Vol 15. Geneva (CH): World Health Organization; 2001.
  30. Fallis D, Fricke M. Indicators of accuracy of consumer health information on the Internet: a study of indicators relating to information for managing fever in children in the home. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2002;9(1):73–9. CrossRefExternal Web Site Icon PubMedExternal Web Site Icon
Publicado por en

No hay comentarios:

Publicar un comentario

Suscribirse a: Enviar comentarios (Atom)