IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0231422.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

"Clicks, likes, shares and comments" a systematic review of breast cancer screening discourse in social media

Author

Listed:
  • Bence Döbrössy
  • Edmond Girasek
  • Anna Susánszky
  • Zsuzsa Koncz
  • Zsuzsa Győrffy
  • Virág Katalin Bognár

Abstract

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.

Suggested Citation

  • Bence Döbrössy & Edmond Girasek & Anna Susánszky & Zsuzsa Koncz & Zsuzsa Győrffy & Virág Katalin Bognár, 2020. ""Clicks, likes, shares and comments" a systematic review of breast cancer screening discourse in social media," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(4), pages 1-15, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0231422
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0231422
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0231422
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0231422&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0231422?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0231422. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.