Dissemination of clinical and scientific practice through social media: a SIAARTI consensus-based document.
Communication
anaesthesia
consensus document
intensive care
scientific dissemination
social-media
Journal
Journal of anesthesia, analgesia and critical care
ISSN: 2731-3786
Titre abrégé: J Anesth Analg Crit Care
Pays: England
ID NLM: 9918591885906676
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
19 Mar 2024
19 Mar 2024
Historique:
received:
06
02
2024
accepted:
11
03
2024
medline:
20
3
2024
pubmed:
20
3
2024
entrez:
20
3
2024
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Dissemination of medical practice and scientific information through social media (SoMe) by clinicians and researchers is increasing. Broad exposure of information can promote connectivity within the scientific community, overcome barriers to access to sources, increase debate, and reveal layperson perspectives and preferences. On the other hand, practices lacking scientific evidence may also be promoted, laypeople may misunderstand the professional message, and clinician may suffer erosion of professional status. The aim of this project was to enhance awareness and advise the anesthesia community and clinicians at large about the potential risks advocate for responsible use of SoMe to disseminate information related to medical practices and knowledge. A modified Delphi process with prespecified consensus criteria was conducted among a multidisciplinary panel of experts, including anesthesiologists-intensivists, clinical psychologists, and forensic medicine specialists. Six items were identified: Ethics and deontological principles, the practice of sharing information via social media, legal aspects, psychological aspects, self-promotion, and criteria for appropriate dissemination. Statements and rationales were produced and subjected to blinded panelists' votes. After reaching consensus, a document was written which then underwent external review by experts uninvolved in the consensus process. The project was promoted by the Italian Society of Anesthesia Analgesia Resuscitation and Intensive Care (SIAARTI). Twelve statements were produced, and consensus was achieved for all. The panel concluded that the general principles guiding dissemination of professional information via SoMe must remain in line with the general principles of ethics, deontology, and scientific validity that guide the medical profession and science in general. Professional equity must be maintained while communicating via SoMe. Medical practices lacking support by scientific evidence should not be disseminated. Patients' informed consent must be obtained before dissemination of information, images, or data. Self-promotion must not be prioritized over any of these principles. When sharing medical practices and scientific information on SoMe, healthcare professionals are advised to act conscientiously and ethically. Local regulations should be adhered to. Institutional training on the potential risks and proper of SoMe for such purpose may contribute to preservation of professional integrity.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Dissemination of medical practice and scientific information through social media (SoMe) by clinicians and researchers is increasing. Broad exposure of information can promote connectivity within the scientific community, overcome barriers to access to sources, increase debate, and reveal layperson perspectives and preferences. On the other hand, practices lacking scientific evidence may also be promoted, laypeople may misunderstand the professional message, and clinician may suffer erosion of professional status. The aim of this project was to enhance awareness and advise the anesthesia community and clinicians at large about the potential risks advocate for responsible use of SoMe to disseminate information related to medical practices and knowledge.
METHODS
METHODS
A modified Delphi process with prespecified consensus criteria was conducted among a multidisciplinary panel of experts, including anesthesiologists-intensivists, clinical psychologists, and forensic medicine specialists. Six items were identified: Ethics and deontological principles, the practice of sharing information via social media, legal aspects, psychological aspects, self-promotion, and criteria for appropriate dissemination. Statements and rationales were produced and subjected to blinded panelists' votes. After reaching consensus, a document was written which then underwent external review by experts uninvolved in the consensus process. The project was promoted by the Italian Society of Anesthesia Analgesia Resuscitation and Intensive Care (SIAARTI).
RESULTS
RESULTS
Twelve statements were produced, and consensus was achieved for all. The panel concluded that the general principles guiding dissemination of professional information via SoMe must remain in line with the general principles of ethics, deontology, and scientific validity that guide the medical profession and science in general. Professional equity must be maintained while communicating via SoMe. Medical practices lacking support by scientific evidence should not be disseminated. Patients' informed consent must be obtained before dissemination of information, images, or data. Self-promotion must not be prioritized over any of these principles.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
When sharing medical practices and scientific information on SoMe, healthcare professionals are advised to act conscientiously and ethically. Local regulations should be adhered to. Institutional training on the potential risks and proper of SoMe for such purpose may contribute to preservation of professional integrity.
Identifiants
pubmed: 38504319
doi: 10.1186/s44158-024-00157-3
pii: 10.1186/s44158-024-00157-3
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Review
Langues
eng
Pagination
21Informations de copyright
© 2024. The Author(s).
Références
Cortegiani A, Manca A, Giarratano A (2020). Predatory journals and conferences: why fake counts. Curr Opin Anaesthesiol. 33. Accessed on 6 Feb 2023
Social media for scientists (2018). Nat Cell Biol. 20:1329. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41556-018-0253-6
Ahmed YA, Ahmad MN, Ahmad N, Zakaria NH (2019) Social media for knowledge-sharing: a systematic literature review. Telemat Informatics 37:72–112
doi: 10.1016/j.tele.2018.01.015
Baron RJ, Ejnes YD (2022) Physicians spreading misinformation on social media - do right and wrong answers still exist in medicine? N Engl J Med United States 387:1–3
doi: 10.1056/NEJMp2204813
https://www.gmc-uk.org/-/media/gmc-site/ethical-guidance/mdg-2023/using-social-media-as-a-medical-professional-english.pdf . Accessed on 6 Feb 2023
Sule S, DaCosta MC, DeCou E, Gilson C, Wallace K, Goff SL (2023) Communication of COVID-19 misinformation on social media by physicians in the US. JAMA Netw open 6:e2328928 (United States)
doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2023.28928
pubmed: 37581886
pmcid: 10427940
DeCamp M, Koenig TW, Chisolm MS (2013) Social media and physicians’ online identity crisis. JAMA United States 310:581–582
Varkey B (2021) Principles of clinical ethics and their application to practice. Med Princ Pract Int J Kuwait Univ Heal Sci Cent 30:17–28 (Switzerland)
Parsa-Parsi RW (2017) The revised Declaration of Geneva: a modern-day physician’s pledge. JAMA United States 318:1971–1972
https://www.wma.net/policies-post/wma-international-code-of-medical-ethics/ . Access on 6 Feb 2023
https://portale.fnomceo.it/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/CODICE-DEONTOLOGIA-MEDICA-2014-e-aggiornamenti_acc.pdf . Access on 6 Feb 2023
Evidence-based medicine: a new approach to teaching the practice of medicine. JAMA J Am Med Assoc. 1992;
Hofstra L, Gommers D (2023) How can doctors counter health misinformation on social media? BMJ. England 382:1932
Hennessy CM, Smith CF, Greener S, Ferns G (2019) Social media guidelines: a review for health professionals and faculty members. Clin Teach England 16:442–447
doi: 10.1111/tct.13033
Ventola CL (2014) Social media and health care professionals: benefits, risks, and best practices. P T United States 39:491–520
Giglietto F, Iannelli L, Valeriani A, Rossi L (2019) ‘Fake news’ is the invention of a liar: how false information circulates within the hybrid news system. Curr Sociol SA 67:625–642
doi: 10.1177/0011392119837536
Vitale F, Misseri G, Ingoglia G, Bonanno G, Gregoretti C, Giarratano A et al (2020) Fake news and patient-family-physician interaction in critical care: concepts, beliefs and potential countermeasures. Anaesthesiol Intensive Ther. 52(1):42–46
doi: 10.5114/ait.2020.92648
pubmed: 31995964
pmcid: 10173129
Merchant RM, Asch DA (2018) Protecting the value of medical science in the age of social media and “fake news.” JAMA 320:2415–2416
doi: 10.1001/jama.2018.18416
pubmed: 30453315
Gorbatov S, Khapova SN, Lysova EI (2018) Personal branding: interdisciplinary systematic review and research agenda. Front Psychol. 9:2238 (Switzerland)
doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02238
pubmed: 30519202
pmcid: 6258780