The use of social media for reproductive health advocacy among physicians: a content analysis of tweets by physicians engaged in reproductive health care.

Q2 Social Sciences
P Christopher Palmedo, Diana Romero, Amy Kwan, Courtney Takats, Sarah Pickering, Heidi E Jones
{"title":"The use of social media for reproductive health advocacy among physicians: a content analysis of tweets by physicians engaged in reproductive health care.","authors":"P Christopher Palmedo, Diana Romero, Amy Kwan, Courtney Takats, Sarah Pickering, Heidi E Jones","doi":"10.1080/17538068.2024.2360825","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Physician voices on social media are important for health policy advocacy. However, the extent to which physicians use best practices around health communications strategy is unknown.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We implemented a content analysis of 1373 tweets from 12 physicians who specialize in reproductive health care and participated in a reproductive health-related advocacy training program, to describe their reproductive health advocacy tweets in terms of levels of engagement, tone, framing and target audience.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The most common framing centered on identifying abortion and contraception as essential health care services. Approximately one-third used proactive (37%), reactive (33%), and neutral (30%) strategies. Less than one-quarter (19%) of the tweets explicitly self-identified as a physician.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Participants used a range of message frames, tones, and audience engagement tactics, suggesting a deliberate health communications strategy. Advocacy training discusses the importance of these domains when using social media for advocacy.</p>","PeriodicalId":38052,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Communication in Healthcare","volume":" ","pages":"285-291"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Communication in Healthcare","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17538068.2024.2360825","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/6/10 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Physician voices on social media are important for health policy advocacy. However, the extent to which physicians use best practices around health communications strategy is unknown.

Methods: We implemented a content analysis of 1373 tweets from 12 physicians who specialize in reproductive health care and participated in a reproductive health-related advocacy training program, to describe their reproductive health advocacy tweets in terms of levels of engagement, tone, framing and target audience.

Results: The most common framing centered on identifying abortion and contraception as essential health care services. Approximately one-third used proactive (37%), reactive (33%), and neutral (30%) strategies. Less than one-quarter (19%) of the tweets explicitly self-identified as a physician.

Conclusions: Participants used a range of message frames, tones, and audience engagement tactics, suggesting a deliberate health communications strategy. Advocacy training discusses the importance of these domains when using social media for advocacy.

医生使用社交媒体宣传生殖健康:对从事生殖健康护理的医生所发推文的内容分析。
背景:医生在社交媒体上的声音对于健康政策的宣传非常重要。然而,医生们在健康传播策略方面使用最佳实践的程度尚不得而知:我们对 12 名专门从事生殖健康护理并参加过生殖健康相关宣传培训项目的医生发布的 1373 条推文进行了内容分析,从参与程度、语气、框架和目标受众等方面描述了他们的生殖健康宣传推文:结果:最常见的框架是将人工流产和避孕确定为基本医疗服务。约三分之一的人采用了主动(37%)、被动(33%)和中立(30%)的策略。不到四分之一(19%)的推文明确表示自己是医生:参与者使用了一系列信息框架、语调和受众参与策略,这表明他们制定了深思熟虑的健康传播策略。宣传培训讨论了使用社交媒体进行宣传时这些领域的重要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Communication in Healthcare
Journal of Communication in Healthcare Social Sciences-Communication
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
44
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信