Use of social media for academic and professional purposes by gynecologic oncologists
Geetu Prakash Bhandoria,Aarthi S Jayraj,Shyamji Tiwari,Federico Migliorelli,Gregg Nelson,Gabriëlle H van Ramshorst,Joanna Kacperczyk-Bartnik,Martina Aida Angeles,Navya Nair,Houssein El Hajj,Nicolò Bizzarri
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/ijgc-2024-005573
2024-07-01
Abstract:Objective: To investigate the prevalence and patterns of social media use among gynecologic oncologists for professional and academic purposes. Methods: A prospective online survey between November and December 2022 targeted gynecologic oncology practitioners (gynecologic oncologists, surgical oncologists, medical oncologists, radiation/clinical oncologists, and onco-pathologists/pathologists). The survey, distributed via various social media platforms, included 40 questions to capture qualitative and quantitative data on social media use. Results: Of 131 respondents from 32 countries, 106 (80.9%) were gynecologic oncologists and affiliated with academic institutions (84.7%). Facebook (n=110, 83.9%), Twitter (n= 108, 82.4%), and Instagram (n=100, 76.3%) were the most used platforms. Respondents used social media to stay updated (n=101, 77.1%), network (n=97, 74%), learn about conferences and webinars (n=97, 74%), and engage in academic discussions (n=84, 64.1%). Following the COVID-19 pandemic, 100/129 (77.5%) reported increased social media use. However, only 32 (24.4%) used it to connect with patients, and concerns were raised about privacy and the need for separate professional and personal accounts. A quarter of respondents hesitated to share their opinions on social media due to the fear of controversy, with 26 (20%) experiencing cyberbullying, yet 120/130 (92.3%) believed it enabled junior professionals to express their views. Concerns about differentiating valid content, information reliability, and the professional perception of sourcing knowledge from social media were noted. Gender, age, specialty, and income level influenced patterns of social media use, with variations in preferences for platforms, content engagement, and purposes, highlighting a complex landscape of social media interaction among gynecologic oncologists. Conclusion: While the use of social media among gynecologic oncologists is prevalent, particularly for academic and professional development, challenges such as cyberbullying, privacy concerns, and the need for formal training in social media navigation persist. Tailored training programs and guidelines could enhance social media's effective and ethical use in this field, promoting a safe environment for professional expression and engagement.