Patients using Facebook for health information

Do you use Facebook to look for health information?

If you said “yes,” and use social networking sites to research your health, you could be in the minority, or majority, depending on which study you read.

Recently, a survey released by the National Research Corporation polled nearly 23,000 patients and found that 41% of them use social media sites to look for health information.  Of those, nearly 94% said Facebook was their site of choice.

It made intuitive sense, since Facebook is accumulating users at a record pace.

Not so fast, said Susannah Fox, of the Pew Internet and American Life Project.  I often cite Pew’s numbers when doing my social media talks, so I pay attention to what Susannah says.

According to Pew, in 2009, 39% of online patients used social media sites.  Of those, only 12% have gotten health information from those sites.  And those numbers haven’t changed much in 2010.

So, are patients increasingly relying on Facebook for their health information, as the recent headlines suggest?  Or is Facebook over-hyped as a tool for e-patients?

Whatever the numbers are — 94% or 12% — we cannot deny that social media will continue grow, and eventually become a source where a growing majority can research their health.  It underscores the responsibility of health professionals to educate patients to critically question what they read online.

For instance, a study from the Journal of General Internal Medicine, looked at the Facebook Wall posts from 15 of the largest diabetes communities.  Among its findings, “approximately 27% of posts featured some type of promotional activity, generally presented as testimonials advertising non-FDA approved, ‘natural’ products.”

When you’re talking about the diabetic population, herbal, or natural, remedies can interact with their medication regimen with potentially harmful effects.

Consider that only a quarter of patients check the source of the health information they read online.  That’s unacceptable. As physicians, we need to continue our efforts to get online, get social, and help patients find reputable health data that can potentially affect their health decisions.

 is an internal medicine physician and on the Board of Contributors at USA Today.  He is founder and editor of KevinMD.com, also on FacebookTwitterGoogle+, and LinkedIn.

email

  • M.Bond

    Its really great to read that with new technology like facebook or other this is now possible. I love it.

    but if you look as a company to Europe or especially Germany such healthinformation or even a named online profiles with a simple weight or bloodinformation is strictly forbidden by datasecurity and privacy law. In the Hospital/pratice its allowed but highly regulated by law and signatures and declarations. These Online-Companies can´t guarantee the security and dataprivacy and will get a high penalty and are not allowed to store data within a onlinesystem in Germany. (even Google Servers are not recommended by law). If one account was fraudulent and a blood- or diabetestype was changed via the internet the company is history.

    I´m really looking forward how this will change in the US or what will happen in the future.

    best
    Michael

  • http://Abnormalfacies.wordpress.com Jim

    Unfortunately, with the explosion of access (anyone can start a professional-looking page, blog, or site through numerous free providers) came the dangerous effect of appearing professional. A few years ago, I believe it was much easier to determine when a page was “professional” versus “amateur” (and thus, more questionable).

    That’s important, because as stated above, people don’t verify the source of the information provided. Worse, there are all sorts of bogus sites and articles that bogus pages can cite, which is misleading to those with lower science literacy. I’ve had to deal with this several times since I started blogging, most recently with radiation hormesis.

    Often, the most people will do is Google something to “verify” it – and let’s say they have an above-average 90 second attention span. In that time, they will only check the first few links. That’s why, as you said, it’s so important for physicians & reputable sources to be the first hits returned. Flood out the garbage.

    Jim

  • Samar

    I think such examples of medical scams on social media – aiming to increase sales and consumption of particularly off the shelf products can be monitored by the social media page owners. And I am referring here to the brand owners or perhaps the HCP promoting a specific topic/disease. These comments can be simply deleted, a comment can be added to clarify that this is not an authorised or well-reputed source to trust. This can work in two ways, first discouraging these posts from accumulating and also raising the attention of the importance of checking the source among patients.

    Sincerely,
    Samar

  • http://jaybanks.ca Jay Banks

    I agree that some sites like the ones selling “natural” products are quite dangerous. One never knows what effect it would have on him. On the other side, I think that there are certain pages that might be helpful. Sometimes people with rare diseases need to know that there are more people in similar situation. Sharing their personal stories is important for them as it makes them feel they are not alone.

  • http://ellerinhealthmedia.com/ Bunny Ellerin

    Thanks for writing this post, Kevin. The biggest issue IMHO is the one you point out that “only a quarter of patients check the source of the health information they read online.” I wrote a blog post on my site using the BUPA data you cited called “The consequences of poor quality health information can be serious.” http://goo.gl/p84ot I’d like to see an MD Seal of Approval or something of that ilk to help consumers get to trusted sources – meaning sources their doctors trust and they recommend. Also to clarify the data from NRC about Facebook…I contacted them and saw the data set. Only 16% of people reported using social media for health, and of that small number 94% reported using Facebook. What they use it for, who knows?

    • http://myheartsisters.org Carolyn Thomas

      There IS such a ‘seal of approval’, Bunny. It’s called “Health On The Net Code” certification. It’s a European-based global program awarded to health-related websites if they can successfully pass a comprehensive application process that guarantees independent “trustworthy health information”.

      As to your question about why social media users would use Facebook (mostly) for accessing health information, you need only check out the LinkedIn, Facebook and Twitter link icons featured prominently right here at the top of this KevinMD site page.

      I’m assuming that Dr. Kevin is using Facebook to help others find the health articles he publishes here. We can’t have it both ways – lamenting the use of Facebook and other social media sites to educate consumers while at the same time trying to educate them through the very same media.

      • http://ellerinhealthmedia.com/ Bunny Ellerin

        thanks for the Health on the Net code info. Interesting it’s been around a long time yet I forgot all about it. Seems time for them to re-engage the public and play a role in helping individuals get to “quality” (whatever that really means) content.

  • http://minochahealth.typepad.com doc

    The explosion in number of dubious sites offering medical info and therapies is an indirect indictment of medical profession. For a variety of reasons, many beyond our control, many health care providers are unable to spend sufficient time with patients who then resort to alternate sources of readily info.

  • susan

    This article is a good reminder that communication is key to better patient-provider relations. Patients must be empowered to ask all kinds of questions, and clinicians must be responsive either in person or through other channels like electronic media. Here’s a video that I found helpful: http://whatstherealcost.org/video.php?post=five-questions

    • http://www.myheartsisters.org Carolyn Thomas

      This video is great – thanks, Susan!