在放射肿瘤学中使用社交媒体:来自 GOCO 小组的多中心数据。

IF 1.2 Q4 ONCOLOGY
Reports of Practical Oncology and Radiotherapy Pub Date : 2024-06-06 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.5603/rpor.100386
Marta Bonet, Enar Recalde, Ana Soto, Alvaro Martinez, Mauricio Murcia, Joel Mases, Miriam Nuñez Fernandez, Juan Carlos Yufera, Ana Alvarez, Maria Aranzazu Eraso, Nicolás Feltes, Ludovic Hernandez, Priscila Bernard, Luis Ramos, Virginia Garcia
{"title":"在放射肿瘤学中使用社交媒体:来自 GOCO 小组的多中心数据。","authors":"Marta Bonet, Enar Recalde, Ana Soto, Alvaro Martinez, Mauricio Murcia, Joel Mases, Miriam Nuñez Fernandez, Juan Carlos Yufera, Ana Alvarez, Maria Aranzazu Eraso, Nicolás Feltes, Ludovic Hernandez, Priscila Bernard, Luis Ramos, Virginia Garcia","doi":"10.5603/rpor.100386","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The purpose of this study was to explore the usage patterns and profiles of social media (SM) platforms among Radiation Oncologists (RO) and Physicists in the scope of the Catalan-Occitan Oncology Group (GOCO).</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>From November 2022 to March 2023, a comprehensive survey was sent to Radiation Oncology professionals within the GOCO group, comprising 31 questions that covered demographics (4) and general inquiries (9), user behavior on social media (7), profile of SM activity (7), and participants' opinions (4) regarding professional use of SM. The survey reached professionals from 12 centers, encompassing 10 in Catalonia and 2 in French Occitania.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The survey achieved a 61.37% response rate (178/290 professionals) with an average age of 41.9 years. 120 (67%) were ROs, and 58 (33%) were Physicists. Instagram led in usage (n = 116), followed by Facebook (n = 107) and Twitter (n = 77). Age correlated inversely with the number of platforms used (Spearman's rank correlation coefficient -0.238, p = 0.001). 28% (n = 42) changed clinical practices based on SM information. A 78.5% (n = 117) didn't counter inappropriate content. Most (71.7%, n = 109) spent < 1 hour daily on professional SM use, however more Physicians exceeded 2 hours compared to Physicists (Cohen's kappa 2 = 0.07). 41.8% (n = 64) weren't emotionally concerned while 22.9% (n = 35) felt overwhelmed by SM overload.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The study offers valuable insights into the usage patterns, preferences, and attitudes of Radiation Oncology professionals towards SM platforms. This understanding is crucial for optimizing content quality and delivering relevant information, thereby enabling more effective marketing strategies and enhancing emotional management among these professionals.</p>","PeriodicalId":47283,"journal":{"name":"Reports of Practical Oncology and Radiotherapy","volume":"29 2","pages":"236-244"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11321777/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Use of social media in radiation oncology: multicenter data from the GOCO Group.\",\"authors\":\"Marta Bonet, Enar Recalde, Ana Soto, Alvaro Martinez, Mauricio Murcia, Joel Mases, Miriam Nuñez Fernandez, Juan Carlos Yufera, Ana Alvarez, Maria Aranzazu Eraso, Nicolás Feltes, Ludovic Hernandez, Priscila Bernard, Luis Ramos, Virginia Garcia\",\"doi\":\"10.5603/rpor.100386\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The purpose of this study was to explore the usage patterns and profiles of social media (SM) platforms among Radiation Oncologists (RO) and Physicists in the scope of the Catalan-Occitan Oncology Group (GOCO).</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>From November 2022 to March 2023, a comprehensive survey was sent to Radiation Oncology professionals within the GOCO group, comprising 31 questions that covered demographics (4) and general inquiries (9), user behavior on social media (7), profile of SM activity (7), and participants' opinions (4) regarding professional use of SM. The survey reached professionals from 12 centers, encompassing 10 in Catalonia and 2 in French Occitania.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The survey achieved a 61.37% response rate (178/290 professionals) with an average age of 41.9 years. 120 (67%) were ROs, and 58 (33%) were Physicists. Instagram led in usage (n = 116), followed by Facebook (n = 107) and Twitter (n = 77). Age correlated inversely with the number of platforms used (Spearman's rank correlation coefficient -0.238, p = 0.001). 28% (n = 42) changed clinical practices based on SM information. A 78.5% (n = 117) didn't counter inappropriate content. Most (71.7%, n = 109) spent < 1 hour daily on professional SM use, however more Physicians exceeded 2 hours compared to Physicists (Cohen's kappa 2 = 0.07). 41.8% (n = 64) weren't emotionally concerned while 22.9% (n = 35) felt overwhelmed by SM overload.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The study offers valuable insights into the usage patterns, preferences, and attitudes of Radiation Oncology professionals towards SM platforms. This understanding is crucial for optimizing content quality and delivering relevant information, thereby enabling more effective marketing strategies and enhancing emotional management among these professionals.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47283,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Reports of Practical Oncology and Radiotherapy\",\"volume\":\"29 2\",\"pages\":\"236-244\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11321777/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Reports of Practical Oncology and Radiotherapy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5603/rpor.100386\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"ONCOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Reports of Practical Oncology and Radiotherapy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5603/rpor.100386","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:本研究旨在探讨加泰罗尼亚-奥齐坦肿瘤学集团(GOCO)范围内的放射肿瘤学家(RO)和物理学家对社交媒体(SM)平台的使用模式和概况:从 2022 年 11 月到 2023 年 3 月,向 GOCO 集团内的放射肿瘤学专业人员发送了一份综合调查,其中包括 31 个问题,涉及人口统计学(4 个)和一般询问(9 个)、社交媒体上的用户行为(7 个)、SM 活动概况(7 个)以及参与者对专业使用 SM 的看法(4 个)。调查对象为来自 12 个中心的专业人士,其中 10 个在加泰罗尼亚,2 个在法国奥西塔尼亚:调查的回复率为 61.37%(178/290 名专业人员),平均年龄为 41.9 岁。其中 120 人(67%)为研究员,58 人(33%)为物理学家。Instagram 使用率最高(116 人),其次是 Facebook(107 人)和 Twitter(77 人)。年龄与使用的平台数量成反比(斯皮尔曼秩相关系数-0.238,p = 0.001)。28%(n = 42)的人根据 SM 信息改变了临床实践。78.5%(n = 117)的人没有反驳不当内容。大多数人(71.7%,n = 109)每天使用专业 SM 的时间小于 1 小时,但与物理学家相比,更多的医生超过了 2 小时(Cohen's kappa 2 = 0.07)。41.8%(n = 64)的人在情绪上并不担心,而22.9%(n = 35)的人则因 SM 负荷过重而感到不堪重负:这项研究为了解放射肿瘤学专业人员对 SM 平台的使用模式、偏好和态度提供了宝贵的见解。这种了解对于优化内容质量和提供相关信息至关重要,从而能够制定更有效的营销策略,加强这些专业人员的情绪管理。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Use of social media in radiation oncology: multicenter data from the GOCO Group.

Background: The purpose of this study was to explore the usage patterns and profiles of social media (SM) platforms among Radiation Oncologists (RO) and Physicists in the scope of the Catalan-Occitan Oncology Group (GOCO).

Materials and methods: From November 2022 to March 2023, a comprehensive survey was sent to Radiation Oncology professionals within the GOCO group, comprising 31 questions that covered demographics (4) and general inquiries (9), user behavior on social media (7), profile of SM activity (7), and participants' opinions (4) regarding professional use of SM. The survey reached professionals from 12 centers, encompassing 10 in Catalonia and 2 in French Occitania.

Results: The survey achieved a 61.37% response rate (178/290 professionals) with an average age of 41.9 years. 120 (67%) were ROs, and 58 (33%) were Physicists. Instagram led in usage (n = 116), followed by Facebook (n = 107) and Twitter (n = 77). Age correlated inversely with the number of platforms used (Spearman's rank correlation coefficient -0.238, p = 0.001). 28% (n = 42) changed clinical practices based on SM information. A 78.5% (n = 117) didn't counter inappropriate content. Most (71.7%, n = 109) spent < 1 hour daily on professional SM use, however more Physicians exceeded 2 hours compared to Physicists (Cohen's kappa 2 = 0.07). 41.8% (n = 64) weren't emotionally concerned while 22.9% (n = 35) felt overwhelmed by SM overload.

Conclusions: The study offers valuable insights into the usage patterns, preferences, and attitudes of Radiation Oncology professionals towards SM platforms. This understanding is crucial for optimizing content quality and delivering relevant information, thereby enabling more effective marketing strategies and enhancing emotional management among these professionals.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.80
自引率
8.30%
发文量
115
审稿时长
16 weeks
期刊介绍: Reports of Practical Oncology and Radiotherapy is an interdisciplinary bimonthly journal, publishing original contributions in clinical oncology and radiotherapy, as well as in radiotherapy physics, techniques and radiotherapy equipment. Reports of Practical Oncology and Radiotherapy is a journal of the Polish Society of Radiation Oncology, the Czech Society of Radiation Oncology, the Hungarian Society for Radiation Oncology, the Slovenian Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology, the Polish Study Group of Head and Neck Cancer, the Guild of Bulgarian Radiotherapists and the Greater Poland Cancer Centre, affiliated with the Spanish Society of Radiotherapy and Oncology, the Italian Association of Radiotherapy and the Portuguese Society of Radiotherapy - Oncology.
×
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