Peer-to-peer sharing in public health interventions: strategies when people share health-related personal information on social media.

IF 2.1 4区 医学 Q2 NURSING International Journal of Qualitative Studies on Health and Well-Being Pub Date : 2024-12-01 Epub Date: 2024-06-26 DOI:10.1080/17482631.2024.2367841
Jens Lindberg, Anna Sofia Lundgren
{"title":"Peer-to-peer sharing in public health interventions: strategies when people share health-related personal information on social media.","authors":"Jens Lindberg, Anna Sofia Lundgren","doi":"10.1080/17482631.2024.2367841","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>As sharing on social media has become an integrated part of everyday life, health and public health actors have started to show interest in the potential of people's peer-to-peer sharing of health-related personal information (HRI) for health interventions. In this article we focus on how people make sense of sharing HRI on social media.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Twenty-two people between the ages 40 and 60 who had taken part in a regional health intervention were interviewed. Using theories about social media sharing, we explore their understandings and negotiations about whether, how much, and how to share HRI and discuss the results in relation to peer-to-peer sharing as a strategy in interventions.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We identified three aspects that were perceived as particularly risky: loss of control, effects on identity, and affecting others negatively, along with strategies that were used to manage risks in practice: avoiding sharing, allocating, and embedding HRI.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>By allocating and embedding HRI, people can unlock motivating affordances for health work. However, strategies to manage risks can also be counterproductive. For actors to provide equality in health promotion, initiatives that include social media sharing need to be mindful of the sometimes counterproductive effects this may have on people's engagement.</p>","PeriodicalId":51468,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Qualitative Studies on Health and Well-Being","volume":"19 1","pages":"2367841"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11210409/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Qualitative Studies on Health and Well-Being","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17482631.2024.2367841","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/6/26 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"NURSING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: As sharing on social media has become an integrated part of everyday life, health and public health actors have started to show interest in the potential of people's peer-to-peer sharing of health-related personal information (HRI) for health interventions. In this article we focus on how people make sense of sharing HRI on social media.

Methods: Twenty-two people between the ages 40 and 60 who had taken part in a regional health intervention were interviewed. Using theories about social media sharing, we explore their understandings and negotiations about whether, how much, and how to share HRI and discuss the results in relation to peer-to-peer sharing as a strategy in interventions.

Results: We identified three aspects that were perceived as particularly risky: loss of control, effects on identity, and affecting others negatively, along with strategies that were used to manage risks in practice: avoiding sharing, allocating, and embedding HRI.

Conclusions: By allocating and embedding HRI, people can unlock motivating affordances for health work. However, strategies to manage risks can also be counterproductive. For actors to provide equality in health promotion, initiatives that include social media sharing need to be mindful of the sometimes counterproductive effects this may have on people's engagement.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
公共卫生干预中的点对点分享:人们在社交媒体上分享与健康有关的个人信息时的策略。
目的:随着社交媒体上的分享已成为日常生活的一部分,卫生和公共卫生机构开始关注人们点对点分享与健康相关的个人信息(HRI)在卫生干预方面的潜力。在本文中,我们将重点讨论人们如何理解在社交媒体上分享与健康相关的个人信息:我们采访了 22 位年龄在 40 岁至 60 岁之间、参加过地区健康干预活动的人。利用社交媒体分享理论,我们探讨了他们对是否分享、分享多少以及如何分享人力资源信息的理解和协商,并讨论了作为干预策略的点对点分享的相关结果:我们发现了被认为具有特别风险的三个方面:失控、对身份的影响和对他人的负面影响,以及在实践中用于管理风险的策略:避免分享、分配和嵌入人力资源信息:结论:通过分配和嵌入人力资源指标,人们可以释放卫生工作的动力。然而,管理风险的策略也可能适得其反。对于在健康促进中提供平等的行动者来说,包括社交媒体分享在内的倡议需要注意有时可能会对人们的参与产生反作用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
5.60%
发文量
99
审稿时长
14 weeks
期刊介绍: International Journal of Qualitative Studies on Health and Well-being acknowledges the international and interdisciplinary nature of health-related issues. It intends to provide a meeting-point for studies using rigorous qualitative methodology of significance for issues related to human health and well-being. The aim of the International Journal of Qualitative Studies on Health and Well-being is to support and to shape the emerging field of qualitative studies and to encourage a better understanding of all aspects of human health and well-being.
期刊最新文献
"It takes a lot of sisu to get through it"- managerial experiences of facing adversities during pandemic. A qualitative study on the caregiver burden experience in home reflux enema management of infants with congenital megacolon. Exploring the experiences of female undergraduate nursing students in providing home healthcare to older adults. Lost and changed meaning in life of people with Long Covid: a qualitative study. Perceptions of healthcare providers on benefits, risks and barriers regarding intradialytic exercise among haemodialysis patients.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1