Dataset Information

Accuracy of online discussion forums on common childhood ailments.

ABSTRACT:

Objectives

The research sought to determine if the health advice provided in online discussion forms aimed at parents of young children is accurate and in agreement with evidence found in evidence-based resources and to discover whether or not these forums are an avenue for misinformation.

Methods

To determine which online forums to use, Google was searched using five common childhood ailments. Forums that appeared five or more times in the first five pages of the Google search for each question were considered. Of these forums, those that met the inclusion criteria were used. Data from a six-month time period was collected and categorized from the discussion forums to analyze the advice being provided about common childhood ailments. Evidence-based resources were used to analyze the accuracy of the advice provided.

Results

Two discussion forums were chosen for analysis. Seventy-four questions from one and 131 questions from the other were health related. Data were not analyzed together. Of the health-related questions on the 2 forums, 65.5% and 51.8%, respectively, provided some type of advice. Of the advice provided, 54.1% and 47.2%, respectively, agreed with the evidence provided in evidence-based resources. A further 16.2% and 6.3% was refuted or was somewhat refuted by the evidence found in evidence-based resources.

Conclusion

While roughly half of the health-related advice provided in online discussion forums aimed at parents of young children is accurate, only a small portion of the advice is incorrect; therefore, these sources are not a major concern for the spread of misinformation.

SUBMITTER: Farrell A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6148614 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Accuracy of online discussion forums on common childhood ailments.

Farrell Alison A

Journal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA 20181001 4

<h4>Objectives</h4>The research sought to determine if the health advice provided in online discussion forms aimed at parents of young children is accurate and in agreement with evidence found in evidence-based resources and to discover whether or not these forums are an avenue for misinformation.<h4>Methods</h4>To determine which online forums to use, Google was searched using five common childhood ailments. Forums that appeared five or more times in the first five pages of the Google search fo ...[more]

PMID: 30271286

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionPeer online mental health forums are commonly used and offer accessible support. Positive and negative impacts have been reported by forum members and moderators, but it is unclear why these impacts occur, for whom and in which forums. This multiple method realist study explores underlying mechanisms to understand how forums work for different people. The findings will inform codesign of best practice guidance and policy tools to enhance the uptake and effectiveness of peer online mental health forums.Methods and analysisIn workstream 1, we will conduct a realist synthesis, based on existing literature and interviews with approximately 20 stakeholders, to generate initial programme theories about the impacts of forums on members and moderators and mechanisms driving these. Initial theories that are relevant for forum design and implementation will be prioritised for testing in workstream 2.Workstream 2 is a multiple case study design with mixed methods with several online mental health forums differing in contextual features. Quantitative surveys of forum members, qualitative interviews and Corpus-based Discourse Analysis and Natural Language Processing of forum posts will be used to test and refine programme theories. Final programme theories will be developed through novel triangulation of the data.Workstream 3 will run alongside workstreams 1 and 2. Key stakeholders from participating forums, including members and moderators, will be recruited to a Codesign group. They will inform the study design and materials, refine and prioritise theories, and codesign best policy and practice guidance.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval was granted by Solihull Research Ethics Committee (IRAS 314029). Findings will be reported in accordance with RAMESES (Realist And MEta-narrative Evidence Syntheses: Evolving Standards) guidelines, published as open access and shared widely, along with codesigned tools.Trial registration numberISRCTN 62469166; the protocol for the realist synthesis in workstream one is prospectively registered at PROSPERO CRD42022352528.

Project description:Increasingly, individuals experiencing loneliness are seeking support on online forums-some of which focus specifically on discussions around loneliness (loneliness forums); loneliness may influence how these individuals communicate in other online forums not focused on loneliness (non-loneliness forums). In order to provide effective and appropriate online interventions around loneliness, it is important to understand how users who publish posts in a loneliness forum communicate in the loneliness forum and non-loneliness forums they belong to. In this paper, using language features, the following analyses are conducted: (1) Posts published on an online loneliness forum on Reddit, /r/Lonely are compared to posts (published by the same users and around the same time period) on two Reddit online forums i.e. an advice seeking forum, /r/AskReddit and a forum focused on discussions around depression (depression forum), /r/depression. (2) Interventions related to loneliness may vary depending on if an individual is lonely and depressed or lonely but not depressed; language use differences in posts published in /r/Lonely by the following set of users are identified: (a) users who post in both /r/Lonely and a depression forum and (b) users who post in /r/Lonely but not in the depression forum. The findings from this work gain new insights, for example: (i) /r/Lonely users tend to seek advice/ask questions related to relationships in the advice seeking forum, /r/AskReddit and (ii) users who are members of the loneliness forum but not the depression forum tend to publish posts (on the loneliness forum) on topic themes related to work/job, however, those who are members of the loneliness and depression forums tend to use more words associated with anger, negation, death, and post on topic themes related to affection relative to relationships in their loneliness forum posts. Some of the findings from this work also align with prior work e.g. users who express loneliness in online forums tend to make more reference to self. These findings aid in gaining insights into how users communicate on these forums and their support needs, thereby informing loneliness interventions.

Project description:A growing body of research has reported on the potential opioid-sparing effects of cannabis and cannabinoids, but less is known about specific mechanisms. The present research examines cannabis-related posts in two large online communities on the Reddit platform ("subreddits") to compare mentions of naturalistic cannabis use by persons self-identifying as actively using opioids versus persons in recovery. We extracted all posts mentioning cannabis-related keywords (e.g., "weed", "cannabis", "marijuana") from December 2015 through August 2019 from an opioid use subreddit and an opioid recovery subreddit. To investigate how cannabis is discussed at-scale, we identified and compared the most frequent phrases in cannabis-related posts in each subreddit using term-frequency-inverse document frequency (TF-IDF) weighting. To contextualize these findings, we also conducted a qualitative content analysis of 200 random posts (100 from each subreddit). Cannabis-related posts were about twice as prevalent in the recovery subreddit (n = 908; 5.4% of 16,791 posts) than in the active opioid use subreddit (n = 4,224; 2.6% of 159,994 posts, p < .001). The most frequent phrases from the recovery subreddit referred to time without using opioids and the possibility of using cannabis as a "treatment." The most frequent phrases from the opioid subreddit referred to concurrent use of cannabis and opioids. The most common motivations for using cannabis were to manage opioid withdrawal symptoms in the recovery subreddit, often in conjunction with anti-anxiety and GI-distress "comfort meds," and to enhance the "high" when used in combination with opioids in the opioid subreddit. Despite limitations in generalizability from pseudonymous online posts, this examination of reports of naturalistic cannabis use in relation to opioid use identified withdrawal symptom management as a common motivation. Future research is warranted with more structured assessments that examines the role of cannabis and cannabinoids in addressing both somatic and affective symptoms of opioid withdrawal.

Dataset Information

Accuracy of online discussion forums on common childhood ailments.

Objectives

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Accuracy of online discussion forums on common childhood ailments.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets