Introduction: Relatively little is known about how Facebook groups are used to facilitate diabetes self-management support. This study provides a critical analysis of public diabetes Facebook groups and their content. Methods: Two trained researchers independently identified 34 public Facebook diabetes groups. A coding and classification scheme was applied to the 20 most recent “wall posts” within 15 of the 34 (44.1%) largest groups (n = 300 posts). Nonparametric Mann-Whiney U tests examined differences in group characteristics between groups with more (active) and less (inactive) than 50 posts in the past month. Multivariable logistic regressions evaluated associations between group purpose, post types, membership (engagement leader vs regular user), and modality. Results: We identified 193 458 members of the 34 largest diabetes Facebook groups (Mdn size = 3124 members, IQR = 1298-8523 members). Many groups (20/34, 58.8%) were created to provide instrumental support, while fewer (12/34, 35.8%) aimed to provide emotional support. Nutrition was the only diabetes self-management topic addressed in more than 30% of posts (n = 107). Posts made by engagement leaders were almost five times more likely to appear within inactive compared to active groups. Discussion: Diabetes Facebook groups are used to share both information and emotional support, with greater emphasis placed on sharing information about nutrition. While engagement leaders should theoretically increase the credibility of online forums, frequent posts by group engagement leaders may actually lead to group decay. Health and diabetes educators should consider how to more effectively leverage social media engagement leaders to disseminate valid health information on diabetes self-management.
Background Despite the relatively high prevalence of low health literacy among individuals living with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), limited empirical attention has been paid to the cognitive and health literacy–related skills that can uniquely influence patients’ health-related quality of life (HRQoL) outcomes. Objective The aim of this study was to examine how health literacy, electronic health (eHealth) literacy, and COPD knowledge are associated with both generic and lung-specific HRQoL in people living with COPD. Methods Adults from the COPD Foundation’s National Research Registry (n=174) completed a cross-sectional Web-based survey that assessed sociodemographic characteristics, comorbidity status, COPD knowledge, health literacy, eHealth literacy, and generic/lung-specific HRQoL. Hierarchical linear regression models were tested to examine the roles of health literacy and eHealth literacy on generic (model 1) and lung-specific (model 2) HRQoL, after accounting for socioeconomic and comorbidity covariates. Spearman rank correlations examined associations between ordinal HRQoL items and statistically significant hierarchical predictor variables. Results After adjusting for confounding factors, health literacy, eHealth literacy, and COPD knowledge accounted for an additional 9% of variance in generic HRQoL (total adjusted R 2 =21%; F 9,164 =6.09, P <.001). Health literacy ( b =.08, SE 0.02, 95% CI 0.04-0.12) was the only predictor positively associated with generic HRQoL ( P <.001). Adding health literacy, eHealth literacy, and COPD knowledge as predictors explained an additional 7.40% of variance in lung-specific HRQoL (total adjusted R 2 =26.4%; F 8,161 =8.59, P <.001). Following adjustment for covariates, both health literacy ( b =2.63, SE 0.84, 95% CI 0.96-4.29, P <.001) and eHealth literacy ( b =1.41, SE 0.67, 95% CI 0.09-2.73, P <.001) were positively associated with lung-specific HRQoL. Health literacy was positively associated with most lung-specific HRQoL indicators (ie, cough frequency, chest tightness, activity limitation at home, confidence leaving home, sleep quality, and energy level), whereas eHealth literacy was positively associated with 5 of 8 (60%) lung-specific HRQoL indicators. Upon controlling for confounders, COPD knowledge ( b =−.56, SE 0.29, 95% CI −1.22 to −0.004, P <.05) was inversely associated with lung-specific HRQoL. Conclusions Health literacy, but not eHealth literacy, was positively associated with g...
Facebook Groups facilitate information exchange and engagement for patients with chronic conditions, including those living with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD); however, little is known about how knowledge is diffused throughout these communities. This study aimed to evaluate the content that is available on COPD-related Facebook Groups, as well as the communication (self-disclosures, social support) and engagement (agreement, emotional reaction) strategies used by members to facilitate these resources. Two researchers independently searched the “Groups” category using the terms “COPD”, “emphysema”, and “chronic bronchitis”. Twenty-six closed (n = 23) and public (n = 3) COPD Facebook Groups were identified with 87,082 total members. The vast majority of Group members belonged to closed (n = 84,684; 97.25%) as compared to open (n = 2398; 2.75%) groups. Medications were the most commonly addressed self-management topic (n = 48; 26.7%). While overall engagement with wall posts was low, the number of “likes” (an indicator of agreement) was significantly greater for wall posts that demonstrated social support as compared to posts that did not (p < 0.001). Findings from this study showed that COPD Facebook group members share specific disease-related experiences and request information about select self-management topics. This information can be used to improve the quality of self-management support provided to members of popular COPD Facebook groups.
Introduction Challenges associated with COPD increase patients’ risk of physical immobility and emotional distress, perpetuating a cycle of symptomatic living that hinders patients’ self-management and adherence to a treatment regimen. There is limited evidence available on how discrete behavioral and health risk factors contribute to the physical and mental distress experienced by people living with COPD. Purpose This secondary data analysis of 2016 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) sought to identify subgroups of people with COPD who were at the highest risk for physical and mental distress. Methods We selected 16 relevant risk indicators in four health-related domains – 1) health risk behaviors, 2) lack of preventive vaccinations, 3) limited health care access, and 4) comorbidities – as predictors of physical and mental health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in the COPD population. Latent class modeling (LCM) was applied to understand how various health-related indicators in these four health domains influenced reports of physical and/or mental distress. Results The majority of BRFSS respondents who reported a COPD diagnosis experienced physical (53.76%) and/or mental (58.23%) distress in the past 14 days. Frequent physical and mental distress were more common in females with COPD in the 45–64 years age group, who were also identified as white and in the lower socioeconomic group. Respondents with intermediate- to high-risk behaviors, intermediate to multiple comorbidities, limited access to health care, and intermediate to low use of preventive vaccinations were more likely to report frequent physical distress compared to the low-risk respondents. Similarly, respondents with high-risk behaviors, intermediate to multiple comorbidities, and low use of preventive vaccinations were more likely to report frequent mental distress than the low-risk group. Discussion This analysis of updated 2016 BRFSS data identified high-risk Americans with COPD who could benefit from disease management and secondary/tertiary health promotion interventions that may improve HRQoL. Future research should address noted disparities in risk factors, particularly among low socioeconomic populations living with COPD.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.