Document Type : Original Article
Authors
- . Carmen García‑Méndez 1
- . Francisca María García‑Padilla 2
- . Macarena Romero‑Martín 2
- . Elena Sosa‑Cordobés 2
- . María del Mar Domínguez-Pérez 3
- . José Miguel Robles‑Romero 2
1 Hospital Central de la Cruz Roja San José y Santa Adela, Madrid, Spain
2 Department of Nursing, University of Huelva, Huelva, Spain
3 Distrito Huelva-Costa, Consejería de Salud, Junta de Andalucía, Huelva, Spain
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Social networks are integrated in our lives and, amongst other functions, they
are a means of dissemination. There are numerous social network accounts dedicated to health
that could be used as an educational resource. The aim of this study was to evaluate the quality of
accounts dedicated to health in different social networks, assessing their content and didactic and
technological effectiveness and accessibility.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Observational cross‑sectional descriptive study in which an
analysis of social networks related to health was carried out from April to June 2021 in Spain.
Twenty‑eight accounts were analysed using a mixed qualitative‑quantitative methodology.
Content analysis of the speeches disseminated through the selected accounts was performed.
In addition, the quality of the accounts was assessed with the Instrumento de Evaluación
de Recursos Educativos Digitales (#IE_RED) (Digital Educational Resources Evaluation
Instrument [#IE_RED]).
RESULTS: Four categories were identified according to the content: student‑focused profiles, specific
professionals’ profiles, current health issues and profiles promoting a healthy lifestyle. In addition, the
quality of the accounts obtained a score that indicates they meet the requirements to be validated
as a good educational digital resource but could be improved. Instagram social network accounts
and those managed by nurses scored significantly higher.
CONCLUSIONS: The analysed accounts were revealed as a quality tool for health dissemination,
with varied content and applicable to teaching. Their use could be applied both to the training of
health professionals and to the promotion of the population’s health.
Keywords
RECS 2015;6:62‑9.
2. Boyd DM, Ellison NB. Social network sites: Definition, history,
and scholarship. J Comput Mediat Commun 2007;13:210‑30.
3. Colás‑Bravo P, González‑Ramírez T, de‑Pablos‑Pons J. Young
people and social networks: Motivations and preferred uses.
Comunicar 2013;40:15‑23.
4. Ventola CL. Social media and health care professionals: Benefits,
risks, and best practices. P T 2014;39:491‑520.
5. Ros‑Martín M. Evolución de los servicios de redes sociales en
internet. Prof De La Inf 2009;18:552‑8.
6. Smith MK, Denali DL. Social media in health education,
promotion, and communication: Reaching rural hispanic
populations along the USA/Mexico border region. J Racial Ethn
Health Disparities 2014;1:194‑8.
7. Soares AE, Lopes MP. The influence of social networks on the
team’s psychological safety. Proceedings 2012;15592. doi: 10.5465/
AMBPP. 2012.15592abstract.
8. Hillman T, Sherbino J. Social media in medical education: A new
pedagogical paradigm?. Postgrad Med J 2015;91:544‑5.
9. Pilgrim K, Bohnet‑Joschko S. Selling health and happiness how
influencers communicate on Instagram about dieting and exercise:
Mixed methods research. BMC Public Health 2019;19:1054.
10. Castelló Martínez A, Del Pino Romero C. La comunicación
publicitaria con Influencers. Redmarka. Rev Mark Aplicado
2015;14:21‑50.
11. Fernández Salazar S, Lafuente Robles N. Integration of
internet and social networks within health strategies. Enf Clín
2016;26:265‑7.
12. Gabarrón E, Fernández‑Luque L. E‑Health and online videos for
health promotion. Gac Sanit 2012;26:197‑200.
13. van Eldik AK, KneerJ, Lutkenhaus RO, Jansz J. Urban influencers:
An analysis of urban identity in youtube content of local social media influencers in a super‑diverse city. Front Psychol
2019;10:2876.
14. Álvarez‑Cordero R. Social media in medical education and health
promotion. Gac Med Mex 2019;155:529‑31.
15. Maher CA, Lewis LK, Ferrar K, Marshall S, De Bourdeaudhuij I,
Vandelanotte C. Are health behavior change interventions that
use online social networks effective? A systematic review. J Med
Internet Res 2014;16:e40.
16. Östlund U, Kidd L, Wengström Y, Rowa‑Dewar N. Combining
qualitative and quantitative research within mixed method
research designs: A methodological review. Int J Nurs Stud
2011;48:369‑83.
17. Graneheim UH, Lindgren, BM, Lundman B. Methodological
challenges in qualitative content analysis: A discussion paper.
Nurse Educ Today 2017;56:29‑34.
18. Asociación Española de Normalización. Quality of
digital educational materials. Available from: https://
www.une.org/encuentra‑tu‑norma/busca-tu-norma/
norma/?Tipo=N&c=N0063263. [Last accessed on Jul 2022].
19. Ross JG, Myers SM. The current use of social media in
undergraduate nursing education: A review of the literature.
Comput Inform Nurs 2017;35:338‑44.
20. Chau MM, Burgermaster M, Mamykina L. The use of social media
in nutrition interventions for adolescents and young adults‑A
systematic review. Int J Med Inform 2018;120:77‑91.
21. Klassen KM, Douglass CH, Brennan L, Truby H, Lim M.
Social media use for nutrition outcomes in young adults:
A mixed‑methods systematic review. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act
2018;15:70.
22. Nakhasi A, Shen AX, Passarella RJ, Appel LJ, Anderson CA.
Online social networks that connect users to physical activity
partners: A review and descriptive analysis. J Med Internet Res
2014;16:e153.
23. Vandelanotte C, Kirwan M, Rebar A, Alley S, Short C, Fallon L,
et al. Examining the use of evidence‑based and social media
supported tools in freely accessible physical activity intervention
websites. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act 2014;11:105.
24. Kim SJ, Marsch LA, Brunette MF, Dallery J. Harnessing facebook
for smoking reduction and cessation interventions: Facebook user
engagement and social support predict smoking reduction. J Med
Internet Res 2017;19:e168.
25. Naslund JA, Kim SJ, Aschbrenner KA, McCulloch LJ, Brunette MF,
Dallery J, et al. Systematic review of social media interventions
for smoking cessation. Addict Behav 2017;73:81‑93.
26. Kung YM, Oh S. Characteristics of nurses who use social media.
Comput Inform Nurs 2014;32:64‑74.
27. Vizcaya‑Moreno MF, Pérez‑Cañaveras RM. Social media used
and teaching methods preferred by generation z students in the
nursing clinical learning environment: A cross‑sectional research
study. Int J Environ Res Public Health 2020;17:8267.
28. O’Connor S, Jolliffe S, Stanmore E, Renwick L, Booth R. Social
media in nursing and midwifery education: A mixed study
systematic review. J Adv Nurs 2018;74:2273‑89.
29. Hollinderbäumer A, Hartz T, Uckert F. Education 2.0 ‑‑ how
has social media and Web 2.0 been integrated into medical
education? A systematical literature review. GMS Z Med Ausbild
2013;30:Doc14.
30. Scott N, Goode D. The use of social media (some) as a learning tool
in healthcare education: An integrative review of the literature.
Nurse Educ Today 2020;87:104357.
31. Ghalavand H, Panahi S, Sedghi S. Opportunities and challenges
of social media for health knowledge management: A narrative
review. J Edu Health Promot 2020;9:144.
32. O’Connor S, Zhang M, Honey M, Lee JJ. Digital professionalism
on social media: A narrative review of the medical, nursing,
and allied health education literature. Int J Med Inform
2021;153:104514.
33. Langenfeld SJ, Cook G, Sudbeck C, Luers T, Schenarts PJ. An
assessment of unprofessional behavior among surgical residents
on Facebook: A warning of the dangers of social media. J Surg
Educ 2014;71:e28‑32.
34. Shanbehzadeh M, Kazemi‑Arpanahi H, Kalkhajeh SG, Basati G.
Systematic review on telemedicine platforms in lockdown
periods: Lessons learned from the COVID‑19 pandemic. J Edu
Health Promot 2021;10:211.
)