Abstract
Background
Medical weblogs (“blogs”) have emerged as a new connection between health professionals and the public.
Objective
To examine the scope and content of medical blogs and approximate how often blog authors commented about patients, violated patient privacy, or displayed a lack of professionalism.
Design
We defined medical blogs as those that contain some medical content and were apparently written by physicians or nurses. We used the Google search term “medical blog” to begin a modified snowball sampling method to identify sites posting entries from 1/1/06 through 12/14/06. We reviewed five entries per blog, categorizing content and characteristics.
Results
We identified 271 medical blogs. Over half (56.8%) of blog authors provided sufficient information in text or image to reveal their identities. Individual patients were described in 114 (42.1%) blogs. Patients were portrayed positively in 43 blogs (15.9%) and negatively in 48 blogs (17.7%). Of blogs that described interactions with individual patients, 45 (16.6%) included sufficient information for patients to identify their doctors or themselves. Three blogs showed recognizable photographic images of patients. Healthcare products were promoted, either by images or descriptions, in 31 (11.4%) blogs.
Conclusions
Blogs are a growing part of the public face of the health professions. They offer physicians and nurses the opportunity to share their narratives. They also risk revealing confidential information or, in their tone or content, risk reflecting poorly on the blog authors and their professions. The health professions should assume some responsibility for helping authors and readers negotiate these challenges.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Sifry D. The state of the live web, April 2007. Available at: http://www.sifry.com/alerts/archives/000493.html. Accessed June 3, 2008.
Hillan J. Physician use of patient-centered weblogs and online journals. Clinical Medicine & Research. 2003;1(4):333–5.
Thielst CB. Weblogs: a communication tool. J Healthc Manag. 2007;52(5):287–9.
Herper M. Best Medical Blogs. Available at: http://www.forbes.com/2003/10/03/cx_mh_1003medblogs.html. Accessed May 21, 2008.
Medical weblog awards: Meet the winners! Available at: http://medgadget.com/archives/2007/01/2006_medical_we.html. Accessed May 21, 2008.
Alvarez M. Is there a blogger in the house? Five great doctor blogs. Available at: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,246919,00.html. Accessed on May 21, 2008.
Kennedy D. Doctor blogs raise concerns about patient privacy. Available at: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=88163567. Accessed May 21, 2008.
Painter K. Paging Dr. Blog: Online discourse raises questions. Available at: http://www.usatoday.com/news/health/painter/2007-05-13-doctor-blog_N.htm. Accessed May 21, 2008.
Boulos MN, Maramba I, Wheeler S. Wikis, blogs and podcasts: a new generation of Web-based tools for virtual collaborative clinical practice and education. BMC Med Educ. 2006;6:41.
Gwozdek AE, Klausner CP, Kerschbaum WE. The utilization of Computer Mediated Communication for case study collaboration. J Dent Hyg. 2008;82(1):8.
Jacobs N. Hospital CEO raises awareness through blog. Profiles in Healthcare Communications 23(2):9–11.
Poonawalla T, Wagner RF Jr. Assessment of a blog as a medium for dermatology education. Dermatol Online J. 2006;12(1):5.
Santoro E. Podcasts, wikis and blogs: the web 2.0 tools for medical and health education. Recent Prog Med. 2007;98(10):484–94.
Sethi SK. Blog/web log — a new easy and interactive website building tool for a non-net savvy radiologist. J Thorac Imaging. 2007;22(2):115–9.
Siegler M. Sounding boards. Confidentiality in medicine-a decrepit concept. N Engl J Med. 1982;307(24):1518–21.
Ubel PA, Zell MM, Miller DJ, Fischer GS, Peters-Stefani D, Arnold RM. Elevator talk: observational study of inappropriate comments in a public space. Am J Med. 1995;99(2):190–4.
Sobel RK. Does laughter make good medicine? N Engl J Med. 2006;354(11):1114–5.
Wynia MK, Latham SR, Kao AC, Berg JW, Emanuel LL. Medical professionalism in society. N Engl J Med. 1999;341(21):1612–6.
ABIM. Medical professionalism in the new millennium: A physician charter. Available at: http://www.abimfoundation.org/professionalism/charter.shtm. Accessed May 21, 2008.
Faugier J, Sargeant M. Sampling hard to reach populations. J Adv Nurs. 1997;26(4):790–7.
Rosen IM, Christie JD, Bellini LM, Asch DA. Health and health care among housestaff in four U.S. internal medicine residency programs. J Gen Intern Med. 2000;15(2):116–21.
Saltzman J. Blogger unmasked, court case upended. Available at: http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2007/05/31/blogger_unmasked_court_case_upended. Accessed May 21 2008.
Taking the pulse of the healthcare blogosphere: A global online survey of healthcare bloggers. Available at: http://www.envisionsolutionsnow.com/pdf/Studies/Healthcare_Blogger_Survey_Report.pdf. Accessed May 31, 2007.
Hornik R. Public Health Communication: Evidence for Behavior Change. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates; 2002.
Kruglyak D. HealthTrain, the open healthcare manifesto. Available at: http://trusted.md/manifesto. Accessed May 31, 2007.
Dimov V. How to write a medical blog and not get fired. Available at: http://casesblog.blogspot.com/2008/02/how-to-write-medical-blog-and-not-get.html. Accessed May 21, 2008.
Sloat, B. Blogging physicians and medical ethics: bumping into patient privacy Rules? Available at: http://thebellwetherdaily.blogspot.com/2007/03/blogging-physicians-and-medical-ethics.html. Accessed May 21, 2008.
Rob. Healthcare blogger code of ethics. Available at: http://medbloggercode.com/about. Accessed May 21, 2008.
Acknowledgements
Funding: Supported in part by The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation Clinical Scholars Program.
Conflict of Interest
None disclosed.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Lagu, T., Kaufman, E.J., Asch, D.A. et al. Content of Weblogs Written by Health Professionals. J GEN INTERN MED 23, 1642–1646 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-008-0726-6
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-008-0726-6