The Impact of Online Social Networks on Health and Health Systems: A Scoping Review and Case Studies. Issue 4 (1st September 2015)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Griffiths, Frances; Dobermann, Tim; Cave, Jonathan A. K.; Thorogood, Margaret; Johnson, Samantha; Salamatian, Kavé; Gomez Olive, Francis X.; Goudge, Jane
• Is Part Of: Policy and internet. Volume 7:Issue 4(2015:Dec.)
• Page Start: 473
• Page End: 496
• Publication Date: 2015-09-01
• Subjects: social networks -- digital communication -- social media -- health -- health care -- pressure group -- interest group -- self‐help group; Internet -- Government policy -- Periodicals; 338.926
• DOI: 10.1002/poi3.97
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1944-2866

Abstract

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.