Characteristics and Medical Accuracy of Online Discussions of Retinal Conditions on a Social Media Platform.

IF 0.8 Q4 OPHTHALMOLOGY Journal of VitreoRetinal Diseases Pub Date : 2025-02-19 eCollection Date: 2025-05-01 DOI:10.1177/24741264251315139
Araliya N Gunawardene, Sanjana Suraneni, Landon J Rohowetz, Jayanth Sridhar
{"title":"Characteristics and Medical Accuracy of Online Discussions of Retinal Conditions on a Social Media Platform.","authors":"Araliya N Gunawardene, Sanjana Suraneni, Landon J Rohowetz, Jayanth Sridhar","doi":"10.1177/24741264251315139","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Purpose:</b> To assess the content and medical accuracy of retina-related patient discussions on Reddit, an anonymous social media platform, to better understand the main concerns and reliability of a highly accessible resource. <b>Methods:</b> A cross-sectional analysis was performed of the top 20 posts and top 3 comments from 2011 to 2022 on the Reddit subforums r/Optometry and r/EyeTriage containing the following keywords: \"retinal detachment\", \"macular edema\", \"macular degeneration\", and \"diabetic retinopathy\". <b>Results:</b> This study assessed 407 posts and comments. Most users who posted were current patients (n = 71 [60.2%]). Most commenters did not specify their identity (n = 172 [59.5%]). A portion of respondents identified as optometrists (n = 51 [17.6%]), and few identified as ophthalmologists (n = 11 [3.8%]). Many statements were medically inaccurate (n = 31 [40.8%]), with pathophysiology comprising the most commonly misunderstood topic (n = 15 [48.4%]). <b>Conclusions:</b> Given the prevalence of inaccurate information and the lack of credibility among Reddit posters, patients should take caution in using these sites for medical guidance regarding retinal conditions.</p>","PeriodicalId":17919,"journal":{"name":"Journal of VitreoRetinal Diseases","volume":" ","pages":"313-317"},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11840817/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of VitreoRetinal Diseases","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/24741264251315139","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/5/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"OPHTHALMOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: To assess the content and medical accuracy of retina-related patient discussions on Reddit, an anonymous social media platform, to better understand the main concerns and reliability of a highly accessible resource. Methods: A cross-sectional analysis was performed of the top 20 posts and top 3 comments from 2011 to 2022 on the Reddit subforums r/Optometry and r/EyeTriage containing the following keywords: "retinal detachment", "macular edema", "macular degeneration", and "diabetic retinopathy". Results: This study assessed 407 posts and comments. Most users who posted were current patients (n = 71 [60.2%]). Most commenters did not specify their identity (n = 172 [59.5%]). A portion of respondents identified as optometrists (n = 51 [17.6%]), and few identified as ophthalmologists (n = 11 [3.8%]). Many statements were medically inaccurate (n = 31 [40.8%]), with pathophysiology comprising the most commonly misunderstood topic (n = 15 [48.4%]). Conclusions: Given the prevalence of inaccurate information and the lack of credibility among Reddit posters, patients should take caution in using these sites for medical guidance regarding retinal conditions.

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
社交媒体平台上视网膜疾病在线讨论的特点及医学准确性
目的:评估匿名社交媒体平台Reddit上视网膜相关患者讨论的内容和医学准确性,以更好地了解高度可访问资源的主要关注点和可靠性。方法:对2011 - 2022年Reddit r/Optometry和r/EyeTriage分论坛中包含“视网膜脱离”、“黄斑水肿”、“黄斑变性”和“糖尿病视网膜病变”等关键词的前20条帖子和前3条评论进行横断面分析。结果:本研究评估了407篇帖子和评论。发帖的大多数用户为当前患者(n = 71[60.2%])。大多数评论者没有说明自己的身份(n = 172[59.5%])。一部分被调查者认为是验光师(n = 51[17.6%]),少数被认为是眼科医生(n = 11[3.8%])。许多陈述在医学上是不准确的(n = 31[40.8%]),病理生理学是最常被误解的主题(n = 15[48.4%])。结论:考虑到Reddit帖子中普遍存在不准确的信息和缺乏可信度,患者在使用这些网站进行视网膜疾病的医疗指导时应谨慎。
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
1.20
自引率
16.70%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Biomarkers of Diabetic Macular Edema on Optical Coherence Tomography After Cataract Surgery. Morphologic Changes of Macular Choroidal Neovascularization on OCT Angiography Following Faricimab Therapy in Patients With AMD. Progressive Intramembranous Cystic Changes in Macular Hole-Associated Epiretinal Proliferation Over 3 Years. No Optic Pit Retinoschisis (NOPIR): A Risk Factor for Glaucoma. An Altmetric and Bibliometric Comparative Analysis from 2014 to 2023 of the 100 Most-Mentioned and 100 Most-Cited Articles About Diabetic Retinopathy.
×
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:604180095
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