Twitter Social Media is an Effective Tool for Breast Cancer Patient Education and Support: Patient-Reported Outcomes by Survey

Overview

Journal J Med Internet Res

Publisher JMIR Publications

Specialty Medical Informatics

Date 2015 Aug 1

PMID 26228234

Citations 130

Authors

Deanna J Attai

Michael S Cowher

Mohammed Al-Hamadani

Jody M Schoger

Alicia C Staley

Jeffrey Landercasper

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Background: Despite reported benefits, many women do not attend breast cancer support groups. Abundant online resources for support exist, but information regarding the effectiveness of participation is lacking. We report the results of a Twitter breast cancer support community participant survey.

Objective: The aim was to determine the effectiveness of social media as a tool for breast cancer patient education and decreasing anxiety.

Methods: The Breast Cancer Social Media Twitter support community (#BCSM) began in July 2011. Institutional review board approval with a waiver of informed consent was obtained for a deidentified survey that was posted for 2 weeks on Twitter and on the #BCSM blog and Facebook page.

Results: There were 206 respondents to the survey. In all, 92.7% (191/206) were female. Respondents reported increased knowledge about breast cancer in the following domains: overall knowledge (80.9%, 153/189), survivorship (85.7%, 162/189), metastatic breast cancer (79.4%, 150/189), cancer types and biology (70.9%, 134/189), clinical trials and research (66.1%, 125/189), treatment options (55.6%, 105/189), breast imaging (56.6%, 107/189), genetic testing and risk assessment (53.9%, 102/189), and radiotherapy (43.4%, 82/189). Participation led 31.2% (59/189) to seek a second opinion or bring additional information to the attention of their treatment team and 71.9% (136/189) reported plans to increase their outreach and advocacy efforts as a result of participation. Levels of reported anxiety before and after participation were analyzed: 29 of 43 (67%) patients who initially reported "high or extreme" anxiety reported "low or no" anxiety after participation (P<.001). Also, no patients initially reporting low or no anxiety before participation reported an increase to high or extreme anxiety after participation.

Conclusions: This study demonstrates that breast cancer patients' perceived knowledge increases and their anxiety decreases by participation in a Twitter social media support group.

Citing Articles

Development and effectiveness evaluation of an interactive e-learning environment to enhance digital health literacy in cancer patients: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

Lange-Drenth L, Willemer H, Banse M, Ernst A, Daubmann A, Holz A Front Digit Health. 2025; 7:1455143.

PMID: 39925640 PMC: 11802532. DOI: 10.3389/fdgth.2025.1455143.

Cross-Platform Analysis of Mammography Narratives: A Comparative Study on Social Media Engagement.

Stirrat T, Garner J, Tailor P, Weitz D, Umair M, Akpolat Y J Patient Cent Res Rev. 2025; 12(1):9-20.

PMID: 39906608 PMC: 11789821. DOI: 10.17294/2330-0698.2100.

Evaluating the User-Perceived Benefit of a Virtual Lung Cancer Patient Education and Support Community: LVNG With Lung Cancer.

Martin M, Bucklen K, Hall L, Wonser D, De Renne G, Sandy B J Adv Pract Oncol. 2025; 1-17.

PMID: 39802539 PMC: 11715400. DOI: 10.6004/jadpro.2024.15.8.8.

Development, Implementation, and Evaluation of a Virtual MedTwitter Curriculum for Medical Students.

Gambril J, Vakil J, Peng J, Ma J, Chiu C Med Sci Educ. 2025; 34(6):1401-1407.

PMID: 39758478 PMC: 11699141. DOI: 10.1007/s40670-024-02122-9.

Social media-based Health Education plus Exercise Program (SHEEP) to improve muscle function among young-old adults with possible sarcopenia in the community: A feasibility study protocol.

Shi Y, Stanmore E, McGarrigle L, Todd C PLoS One. 2025; 20(1):e0303481.

PMID: 39752424 PMC: 11698421. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0303481.

References

Sugawara Y, Narimatsu H, Hozawa A, Shao L, Otani K, Fukao A . Cancer patients on Twitter: a novel patient community on social media. BMC Res Notes. 2012; 5:699. PMC: 3599295. DOI: 10.1186/1756-0500-5-699. View

Lepore S, Buzaglo J, Lieberman M, Golant M, Greener J, Davey A . Comparing standard versus prosocial internet support groups for patients with breast cancer: a randomized controlled trial of the helper therapy principle. J Clin Oncol. 2014; 32(36):4081-6. PMC: 4265118. DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2014.57.0093. View

Bender J, Katz J, Ferris L, Jadad A . What is the role of online support from the perspective of facilitators of face-to-face support groups? A multi-method study of the use of breast cancer online communities. Patient Educ Couns. 2013; 93(3):472-9. DOI: 10.1016/j.pec.2013.07.009. View

Bjorneklett H, Rosenblad A, Lindemalm C, Ojutkangas M, Letocha H, Strang P . Long-term follow-up of a randomized study of support group intervention in women with primary breast cancer. J Psychosom Res. 2013; 74(4):346-53. DOI: 10.1016/j.jpsychores.2012.11.005. View

Bjorneklett H, Lindemalm C, Rosenblad A, Ojutkangas M, Letocha H, Strang P . A randomised controlled trial of support group intervention after breast cancer treatment: results on anxiety and depression. Acta Oncol. 2011; 51(2):198-207. DOI: 10.3109/0284186X.2011.610352. View

Ussher J, Kirsten L, Butow P, Sandoval M . A qualitative analysis of reasons for leaving, or not attending, a cancer support group. Soc Work Health Care. 2008; 47(1):14-29. DOI: 10.1080/00981380801970673. View

Stephen J, Rojubally A, Macgregor K, McLeod D, Speca M, Taylor-Brown J . Evaluation of CancerChatCanada: a program of online support for Canadians affected by cancer. Curr Oncol. 2013; 20(1):39-47. PMC: 3557330. DOI: 10.3747/co.20.1210. View

Himelboim I, Han J . Cancer talk on twitter: community structure and information sources in breast and prostate cancer social networks. J Health Commun. 2013; 19(2):210-25. DOI: 10.1080/10810730.2013.811321. View

Greenberg C, Kennedy G . Advancing quality measurement to include the patient perspective. Ann Surg. 2014; 260(1):10-2. DOI: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000000730. View

10.

van Uden-Kraan C, Drossaert C, Taal E, Seydel E, van de Laar M . Self-reported differences in empowerment between lurkers and posters in online patient support groups. J Med Internet Res. 2008; 10(2):e18. PMC: 2483925. DOI: 10.2196/jmir.992. View

11.

Nagler R, Gray S, Romantan A, Kelly B, DeMichele A, Armstrong K . Differences in information seeking among breast, prostate, and colorectal cancer patients: results from a population-based survey. Patient Educ Couns. 2010; 81 Suppl:S54-62. PMC: 2993788. DOI: 10.1016/j.pec.2010.09.010. View

12.

Hong Y, Pena-Purcell N, Ory M . Outcomes of online support and resources for cancer survivors: a systematic literature review. Patient Educ Couns. 2011; 86(3):288-96. DOI: 10.1016/j.pec.2011.06.014. View

13.

Han J, Kim J, Yoon H, Shim M, McTavish F, Gustafson D . Social and psychological determinants of levels of engagement with an online breast cancer support group: posters, lurkers, and nonusers. J Health Commun. 2011; 17(3):356-71. PMC: 3556823. DOI: 10.1080/10810730.2011.585696. View

14.

Savitz L, Luther K . Patient-Reported Measures. Healthc Exec. 2015; 30(1):74, 76-7. View

15.

Sage J . Using S-CAHPS. Bull Am Coll Surg. 2013; 98(8):53-6. View

16.

Bingener J, Sloan J, Boughey J . Patient quality of life: vitally important. Bull Am Coll Surg. 2014; 99(5):46-8. View

17.

Lepore S, Buzaglo J, Lieberman M, Golant M, Davey A . Standard versus prosocial online support groups for distressed breast cancer survivors: a randomized controlled trial. BMC Cancer. 2011; 11:379. PMC: 3201039. DOI: 10.1186/1471-2407-11-379. View

18.

Tsuya A, Sugawara Y, Tanaka A, Narimatsu H . Do cancer patients tweet? Examining the twitter use of cancer patients in Japan. J Med Internet Res. 2014; 16(5):e137. PMC: 4060148. DOI: 10.2196/jmir.3298. View