Examining the Influence on Perceptions of Endometriosis via Analysis of Social Media Posts: Cross-sectional Study.
Facebook
Instagram
endometriosis
engagement
influencer
social media
Journal
JMIR formative research
ISSN: 2561-326X
Titre abrégé: JMIR Form Res
Pays: Canada
ID NLM: 101726394
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
18 Mar 2022
18 Mar 2022
Historique:
received:
10
06
2021
accepted:
16
12
2021
revised:
13
10
2021
entrez:
18
3
2022
pubmed:
19
3
2022
medline:
19
3
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Social media platforms, such as Facebook and Instagram, are increasingly being used to share health-related information by "influencers," regular users, and institutions alike. While patients may benefit in various ways from these interactions, little is known about the types of endometriosis-related information published on social media. As digital opinion leaders influence the perceptions of their followers, physicians need to be aware about ideas and beliefs that are available online, in order to address possible misconceptions and provide optimal patient care. The aim of this study was to identify and analyze frequent endometriosis-related discussion topics on social media in order to offer caregivers insight into commonly discussed subject matter and aspects. We performed a systematic search using predefined parameters. Using the term "endometriosis" in Facebook's search function and a social media search engine, a list of Facebook pages was generated. A list of Instagram accounts was generated using the terms "endometriosis" and "endo" in Instagram's search function. Pages and accounts in English with 5000 or more followers or likes were included. Nonpublic, unrelated, or inactive pages and accounts were excluded. For each account, the most recent 10 posts were identified and categorized by two independent examiners using qualitative content analysis. User engagement was calculated using the numbers of interactions (ie, shares, likes, and comments) for each post, stratified by the number of followers. A total of 39 Facebook pages and 43 Instagram accounts with approximately 1.4 million followers were identified. Hospitals and medical centers made up 15% (6/39) of the Facebook pages and 5% (2/43) of the Instagram accounts. Top accounts had up to 111,600 (Facebook) and 41,400 (Instagram) followers. A total of 820 posts were analyzed. On Facebook, most posts were categorized as "awareness" (101/390, 25.9% of posts), "education and research" (71/390, 18.2%), and "promotion" (64/390, 16.4%). On Instagram, the top categories were "inspiration and support" (120/430, 27.9% of posts), "awareness" (72/430, 16.7%), and "personal story" (72/430, 16.7%). The frequency of most categories differed significantly between platforms. User engagement was higher on Instagram than on Facebook (3.20% vs 0.97% of followers per post). On Instagram, the highest percentage of users engaged with posts categorized as "humor" (mean 4.19%, SD 4.53%), "personal story" (mean 3.02%, SD 4.95%), and "inspiration and support" (mean 2.83%, SD 3.08%). On Facebook, posts in the categories "awareness" (mean 2.05%, SD 15.56%), "humor" (mean 0.91%, SD 1.07%), and "inspiration and support" (mean 0.56%, SD 1.37%) induced the most user engagement. Posts made by hospitals and medical centers generated higher user engagement than posts by regular accounts on Facebook (mean 1.44%, SD 1.11% vs mean 0.88%, SD 2.71% of followers per post) and Instagram (mean 3.33%, SD 1.21% vs mean 3.19%, SD 2.52% of followers per post). Facebook and Instagram are widely used to share endometriosis-related information among a large number of users. Most posts offer inspiration or support, spread awareness about the disease, or cover personal issues. Followers mostly engage with posts with a humoristic, supportive, and awareness-generating nature. Health care providers should be aware about the topics discussed online, as this may lead to an increased understanding of the needs and demands of digitally proficient patients with endometriosis.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Social media platforms, such as Facebook and Instagram, are increasingly being used to share health-related information by "influencers," regular users, and institutions alike. While patients may benefit in various ways from these interactions, little is known about the types of endometriosis-related information published on social media. As digital opinion leaders influence the perceptions of their followers, physicians need to be aware about ideas and beliefs that are available online, in order to address possible misconceptions and provide optimal patient care.
OBJECTIVE
OBJECTIVE
The aim of this study was to identify and analyze frequent endometriosis-related discussion topics on social media in order to offer caregivers insight into commonly discussed subject matter and aspects.
METHODS
METHODS
We performed a systematic search using predefined parameters. Using the term "endometriosis" in Facebook's search function and a social media search engine, a list of Facebook pages was generated. A list of Instagram accounts was generated using the terms "endometriosis" and "endo" in Instagram's search function. Pages and accounts in English with 5000 or more followers or likes were included. Nonpublic, unrelated, or inactive pages and accounts were excluded. For each account, the most recent 10 posts were identified and categorized by two independent examiners using qualitative content analysis. User engagement was calculated using the numbers of interactions (ie, shares, likes, and comments) for each post, stratified by the number of followers.
RESULTS
RESULTS
A total of 39 Facebook pages and 43 Instagram accounts with approximately 1.4 million followers were identified. Hospitals and medical centers made up 15% (6/39) of the Facebook pages and 5% (2/43) of the Instagram accounts. Top accounts had up to 111,600 (Facebook) and 41,400 (Instagram) followers. A total of 820 posts were analyzed. On Facebook, most posts were categorized as "awareness" (101/390, 25.9% of posts), "education and research" (71/390, 18.2%), and "promotion" (64/390, 16.4%). On Instagram, the top categories were "inspiration and support" (120/430, 27.9% of posts), "awareness" (72/430, 16.7%), and "personal story" (72/430, 16.7%). The frequency of most categories differed significantly between platforms. User engagement was higher on Instagram than on Facebook (3.20% vs 0.97% of followers per post). On Instagram, the highest percentage of users engaged with posts categorized as "humor" (mean 4.19%, SD 4.53%), "personal story" (mean 3.02%, SD 4.95%), and "inspiration and support" (mean 2.83%, SD 3.08%). On Facebook, posts in the categories "awareness" (mean 2.05%, SD 15.56%), "humor" (mean 0.91%, SD 1.07%), and "inspiration and support" (mean 0.56%, SD 1.37%) induced the most user engagement. Posts made by hospitals and medical centers generated higher user engagement than posts by regular accounts on Facebook (mean 1.44%, SD 1.11% vs mean 0.88%, SD 2.71% of followers per post) and Instagram (mean 3.33%, SD 1.21% vs mean 3.19%, SD 2.52% of followers per post).
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
Facebook and Instagram are widely used to share endometriosis-related information among a large number of users. Most posts offer inspiration or support, spread awareness about the disease, or cover personal issues. Followers mostly engage with posts with a humoristic, supportive, and awareness-generating nature. Health care providers should be aware about the topics discussed online, as this may lead to an increased understanding of the needs and demands of digitally proficient patients with endometriosis.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35302501
pii: v6i3e31135
doi: 10.2196/31135
pmc: PMC8976247
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
e31135Informations de copyright
©Julian Matthias Metzler, Dimitrios Rafail Kalaitzopoulos, Laurin Burla, Gabriel Schaer, Patrick Imesch. Originally published in JMIR Formative Research (https://formative.jmir.org), 18.03.2022.
Références
J Med Internet Res. 2015 Mar 17;17(3):e70
pubmed: 25783036
Obstet Gynecol. 2020 Jan;135(1):166-173
pubmed: 31809440
J Assist Reprod Genet. 2020 Jun;37(6):1311-1312
pubmed: 32468332
JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2019 Jul 18;7(7):e12042
pubmed: 31322129
Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg. 2020 May;26(5):283-286
pubmed: 32282524
Int J Nurs Pract. 2020 Aug;26(4):e12833
pubmed: 32189457
Med Inform Internet Med. 2006 Mar;31(1):45-52
pubmed: 16754366
J Assist Reprod Genet. 2020 Jun;37(6):1371-1378
pubmed: 32382959
Gynecol Obstet Fertil. 2016 Nov;44(11):618-619
pubmed: 27765429
JBRA Assist Reprod. 2020 Jan 30;24(1):9-12
pubmed: 31361436
PLoS One. 2020 May 12;15(5):e0233114
pubmed: 32396552
Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2021 Jul;262:232-238
pubmed: 34091158
Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2010 May;89(5):646-50
pubmed: 20235893
J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2021 Sep;28(9):1637-1642
pubmed: 33582381
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2017 May;216(5):451-458.e1
pubmed: 27840143
N Engl J Med. 2020 Mar 26;382(13):1244-1256
pubmed: 32212520
J Med Internet Res. 2017 Jan 19;19(1):e9
pubmed: 28104579
J Med Internet Res. 2013 Apr 23;15(4):e85
pubmed: 23615206
Gynecol Obstet Fertil. 2013 Jun;41(6):372-80
pubmed: 22521982
Hum Reprod. 1996 Apr;11(4):878-80
pubmed: 8671344