Improving Social Media-Based Support Groups for the Rare Disease Community: Interview Study With Patients and Parents of Children with Rare and Undiagnosed Diseases
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: The rarity that is inherent in rare disease (RD) often means that patients and parents of children with RDs feel uniquely isolated and therefore are unprepared or unsupported in their care. To overcome this isolation, many within the RD community turn to the internet, and social media groups in particular, to gather useful information about their RDs. While previous research has shown that social media support groups are helpful for those affected by RDs, it is unclear what these groups are particularly useful or helpful for patients and parents of children with RDs. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to identify what specific features of disease-related support groups (DRSGs) the RD community finds particularly useful or supportive and provide a set of recommendations to improve social media-based RD support groups based on this information. METHODS: Semistructured qualitative interviews were performed with patients and parents of patients with RDs. Interview participants had to be at least 18 years of age at the time of the interview, be seen by a genetics specialist at a partner health care institution and be proficient in the English language. Social media use was not a prerequisite for participation, so interview participants ranged from extensive users of social media to those who chose to remain off all social media. All interviews were conducted by phone, recorded, and then transcribed. Interview transcripts were then coded using the 6 steps outlined by Braun and Clarke. Three researchers (TAD, SLV, and CMEH) performed initial coding. After this, the study team conducted a review of themes and all members of the team agreed upon a final analysis and presentation of data. RESULTS: We conducted 31 interviews (mean age 40, SD 10.04 years; n=27, 87% were women; n=30, 97% were non-Hispanic White). Thematic analysis revealed that social media DRSG users identified the informational usefulness of these groups as being related to the gathering and sharing of specific information about an RD, clarification about the importance and meaning of certain symptoms, and obtaining insight into an RD's progression and prognosis. Participants also identified that DRSGs were useful sources of practical information, such as tips and tricks about managing RD-related issues and concerns. In addition, participants found DRSGs to be a useful space for sharing their disease-related stories but also highlighted a feeling of exhaustion from overexposure and overuse of DRSGs. CONCLUSIONS: This study identifies the usefulness of DRSGs for the RD community and provides a set of recommendations to improve future instances of DRSGs. These recommendations can be used to create DRSGs that are less prone to splintering into other DRSGs, thus minimizing the risk of having important RD-related information unhelpfully dispersed amongst a multitude of support groups.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».