Subscribe to RSS
![](/products/assets/desktop/img/oa-logo.png)
DOI: 10.1055/s-0041-1736661
Self-Reported Social Media Use among Ophthalmology Residents
Funding Bascom Palmer Eye Institute received funding from the NIH Core Grant P30EY014801, Department of Defense Grant #W81XWH-13–1-0048, and a Research to Prevent Blindness Unrestricted Grant. The sponsors or funding organizations had no role in the design or conduct of this research.![](https://www.thieme-connect.de/media/10.1055-s-00033285/202102/lookinside/thumbnails/10-1055-s-0041-1736661_275ra-1.jpg)
Abstract
Objective To assess ophthalmology trainees' self-reported use of and attitudes toward social media.
Methods An online survey was distributed by email to ophthalmology residency applicants of the Bascom Palmer Eye Institute between September 2016 and January 2020.
Results Of the 1,688 email recipients, the survey was filled by 208 ophthalmology trainees (12.3%). Nearly all trainees reported using social media for personal purposes (92.3%), while less than half used social media for professional purposes (43.4%). There were mixed sentiments regarding the impact of social media on the patient–physician relationship, with the majority feeling that it challenges a physician's authority (55.2%) but also empowers the patient (57.5%) and encourages shared care (92.8%). Twenty-five percent of trainees had reviewed professional social media guidelines, and most rated the quality of medical information on social media as “poor” (60.9%). There were low rates of trainees looking up patients (13.8%), providing their account information to patients (1.5%), responding to patients' messages (2.6%), following patients' accounts (2.6%), and being followed by patients (2.6%).
Conclusion The majority of ophthalmology trainees are active on social media. As these trainees enter practice, ophthalmology will likely see a rise in social media use. Training programs should consider a formal social media policy that is shared with all trainees as part of their education.
Publication History
Received: 17 March 2021
Accepted: 26 July 2021
Article published online:
01 December 2021
© 2021. The Author(s). This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
Thieme Medical Publishers, Inc.
333 Seventh Avenue, 18th Floor, New York, NY 10001, USA
-
References
- 1 Park SSE, Akella SS, Moon JY. et al. Building your brand: analysis of successful oculoplastic surgeons on social media. Ophthal Plast Reconstr Surg 2020; 36 (06) 582-589
- 2 McGregor F, Somner JE, Bourne RR, Munn-Giddings C, Shah P, Cross V. Social media use by patients with glaucoma: what can we learn?. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt 2014; 34 (01) 46-52
- 3 Fathy C, Cehelyk E, Israilevich R. et al. When ophthalmology goes virtual amid a pandemic: content analysis of the 2020 #ASCRSVirtualMeeting. J Cataract Refract Surg 2020
- 4 Mangan MS, Cakir A, Yurttaser Ocak S, Tekcan H, Balci S, Ozcelik Kose A. Analysis of the quality, reliability, and popularity of information on strabismus on YouTube. Strabismus 2020; 28 (04) 175-180
- 5 Leitão Guerra RL. A perspective on retina education through social media. Int J Retina Vitreous 2020; 6: 44
- 6 O'Glasser AY, Jaffe RC, Brooks M. To tweet or not to tweet, that is the question. Semin Nephrol 2020; 40 (03) 249-263
- 7 Tsui E, Rao RC. Navigating social media in #ophthalmology. Ophthalmology 2019; 126 (06) 779-782
- 8 Dubin JM, Greer AB, Patel P. et al. Global survey of the roles and attitudes toward social media platforms amongst urology trainees. Urology 2021; 147: 64-67
- 9 van den Eijnden RJJM, Lemmens JS, Valkenburg PM. The Social Media Disorder Scale. Comput Human Behav 2016; 61: 478-487
- 10 Al-Khersan H, Lazzarini TA, Fan KC. et al. Social media in ophthalmology: an analysis of use in the professional sphere. Health Informatics J 2020; 26 (04) 2967-2975
- 11 Christiansen SM, Oetting TA, Herz NL. et al. Twitter at the 2014 and 2015 Annual Meetings of the American Academy of Ophthalmology. Ophthalmology 2016; 123 (08) 1835-1837
- 12 DeCamp M. Social media and medical professionalism: toward an expanded program. Arch Intern Med 2012; 172 (18) 1418-1419
- 13 American Academy of Ophthalmology. Advisory opinion - social media and professionalism. 2018 . Accessed August 24, 2021 at: https://www.aao.org/ethics-detail/advisory-opinion-social-media-professionalism
- 14 Wheeler CK, Said H, Prucz R, Rodrich RJ, Mathes DW. Social media in plastic surgery practices: emerging trends in North America. Aesthet Surg J 2011; 31 (04) 435-441
- 15 Kaufman LB. Use social media to market your practice. Information Technology Practice Perfect 2016; 47-48
- 16 Steven M, Christiansen JGC. Top 5 social media platforms for ophthalmologists. 2014 . Available at: https://www.aao.org/young-ophthalmologists/yo-info/article/top-5-social-media-platforms-ophthalmologists
- 17 Jalkiewicz JF. Leverage social media to build your practice. Ophthalmology Management 2019; 23: 44 , 46, 48
- 18 Caruso Brown AE, Arthur JD, Mutrie LH, Lantos JD. Seeking a second opinion on social media. Pediatrics 2019; 144 (05) e20190817 DOI: 10.1542/peds.2019-0817.
- 19 Tran EM, Scott IU, Clark MA, Greenberg PB. Resident wellness in US ophthalmic graduate medical education: the resident perspective. JAMA Ophthalmol 2018; 136 (06) 695-701
- 20 Tran EM, Scott IU, Clark MA, Greenberg PB. Assessing and promoting the wellness of United States ophthalmology residents: a survey of program directors. J Surg Educ 2018; 75 (01) 95-103
- 21 Siddiqui N, Hariprasad SM, Tsipursky M. Burnout in ophthalmology. Ophthalmic Surg Lasers Imaging Retina 2020; 51 (09) 480-484