Sosyal medyada paylaşılan tıbbi bilgilere güven: sağlık profesyonelleri ve öğrencileri arasında kesitsel bir anket

Year 2025, Volume: 16 Issue: 3, 570 - 578, 30.09.2025

Fatih Öner Kaya , Yılmaz Sezgin

https://doi.org/10.18663/tjcl.1779742

Abstract

Amaç: Bu araştırmanın amacı, sağlık alanında çalışan farklı meslek grupları arasında sosyal medyada paylaşılan tıbbi bilgilere duyulan güven düzeyini değerlendirmek ve bu güvenin yaşa, cinsiyete ve mesleki role göre nasıl değiştiğini araştırmaktır.
Gereç ve Yöntemler: Bu kesitsel anket çalışmasına 200 tıp öğrencisi, 75 eczacı, 75 hemşire ve 50 hekimden oluşan toplam 350 katılımcı dahil edildi. Anket 30 madde içermekte ve demografi, kullanım alışkanlıkları, güven ve yanlış bilgiye maruziyeti kapsamaktadır. Açıklayıcı faktör analizi sonucunda dokuz maddelik Çevrimiçi Tıbbi Bilgiye Güven ve Tutum Ölçeği (TAOMIS) geliştirilmiş ve ölçeğin güvenilirliği kabul edilebilir düzeyde bulunmuştur (Cronbach α=0,742). Puanlar (1–4) 0–100 aralığına dönüştürülmüştür.
Bulgular: Tüm katılımcılar günlük sosyal medya kullandığını belirtmiştir. Öğrenciler ve hemşireler >2 saat/gün kullanım bildirirken, hekimler ve eczacılar çoğunlukla 1–2 saat kullanmıştır (p<0,001). TikTok en sık öğrenciler (%41,5) ve hemşireler (%56,0) tarafından kullanılmış, YouTube ise hekimler (%42,0) ve eczacılarda (%42,7) daha yüksek bulunmuştur (p<0,001). Çevrimiçi içeriğe güven düşüktür; hekimlerin %68’i ve öğrencilerin %58,5’i bilgileri “çoğunlukla güvenilmez” olarak değerlendirmiştir. Yanlış bilgiyle karşılaştığında hekimler ve eczacılar daha çok “doğrulama ve düzeltme”yi seçerken, öğrenciler ve hemşireler sıklıkla “görmezden gelme”yi bildirmiştir (p<0,001). TAOMIS puanları meslek gruplarına göre anlamlı farklılık göstermiştir (p<0,001): en yüksek ortalama hekimlerde (73,5), ardından eczacılarda (67,3) görülmüş; hemşireler (51,3) ve öğrenciler (41,9) daha düşük puan almıştır. Cinsiyet açısından fark yoktur (p=0,543), yaşla birlikte puanlar artış göstermiştir.
Sonuç: Sağlık profesyonelleri sosyal medyadaki tıbbi bilgilere güven ve tutum açısından farklılık göstermektedir. Hekimler ve eczacılar daha eleştirel, kanıta dayalı yaklaşımlar sergilerken; öğrenciler ve hemşireler yanlış bilgiye karşı daha savunmasızdır. Bulgular, sağlık profesyonelleri eğitimine dijital sağlık okuryazarlığı ve yanlış bilgiyle mücadele becerilerinin entegre edilmesi gerektiğini ve kurumsal politikaların güçlendirilmesinin önemini ortaya koymaktadır.

Keywords

sosyal medya , yanlış bilgi , güven , sağlık profesyonelleri , dijital sağlık okuryazarlığı

Trust in medical information shared on social media: a cross-sectional survey among healthcare professionals and students

Abstract

Aim: This study aimed to assess the level of trust in medical information shared on social media among different professional groups in the healthcare field, and to examine how this trust varies by age, gender, and professional role.
Material and Methods: A total of 350 participants, including 200 medical students, 75 pharmacists, 75 nurses, and 50 physicians, were included in this cross-sectional survey study. The 30-item questionnaire covered demographics, usage patterns, trust, and misinformation. Exploratory factor analysis identified a nine-item Trust and Attitudes toward Online Medical Information Scale (TAOMIS) with acceptable reliability (Cronbach’s α=0.742). Scores (1–4) were rescaled to 0–100.
Results: All respondents reported daily social media use. Students and nurses more often spent >2 hours/day, while physicians and pharmacists used 1–2 hours (p<0.001). TikTok was preferred by students (41.5%) and nurses (56.0%), while YouTube use was higher among physicians (42.0%) and pharmacists (42.7%) (p<0.001). Trust in online content was low: 68% of physicians and 58.5% of students rated information as often unreliable. Physicians and pharmacists more often verified and corrected misinformation, whereas nurses and students tended to ignore it (p<0.001). TAOMIS scores differed significantly by role (p<0.001): physicians scored highest (73.5), followed by pharmacists (67.3), while nurses (51.3) and students (41.9) scored lower. Scores did not differ by gender but increased with age.
Conclusions: Healthcare professionals vary in their trust and responses to online medical information. Physicians and pharmacists showed more evidence-aligned attitudes, whereas students and nurses were more vulnerable to misinformation. Integrating digital health literacy into health professions education and strengthening institutional policies are needed to safeguard trust in medical knowledge.

Keywords

social media , misinformation , trust , healthcare professionals

Ethical Statement

The study was performed in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki, and was approved by the Trabzon University Clinical Research Ethics Committee (Date: 10.09.2024, Approval No: 2024/09).

References

• Chen J and Wang Y. Social Media Use for Health Purposes: Systematic Review. J Med Internet Res. 2021;23(5):e17917.
• Steffens MS, Dunn AG, Wiley KE, and Leask J. How organisations promoting vaccination respond to misinformation on social media: a qualitative investigation. BMC Public Health. 2019;19(1):1348.
• Grimes DR. Health disinformation & social media: The crucial role of information hygiene in mitigating conspiracy theory and infodemics. EMBO Rep. 2020;21(11):e51819.
• Zarocostas J. How to fight an infodemic. Lancet. 2020;395(10225):676.
• Office of the Surgeon General. Confronting Health Misinformation: The U.S. Surgeon General's Advisory on Building a Healthy Information Environment. Washington (DC): US Department of Health and Human Services. Publications and Reports of the Surgeon General. 2021;
• Neely S, Eldredge C, and Sanders R. Health Information Seeking Behaviors on Social Media During the COVID-19 Pandemic Among American Social Networking Site Users: Survey Study. J Med Internet Res. 2021;23(6):e29802.
• Stimpson JP and Ortega AN. Social media users' perceptions about health mis- and disinformation on social media. Health Aff Sch. 2023;1(4)
• Schumacher S, Sparks G, Montalvo J III, et al. KFF Health Information and Trust Tracking Poll – Health Information and Advice on Social Media. Available from: https://www.kff.org/public-opinion/kff-health-information-and-trust-tracking-poll-health-information-and-advice-on-social-media/. Access Date: 15.08.2025.
• Polyzou M, Kiefer D, Baraliakos X, and Sewerin P. Addressing the spread of health-related misinformation on social networks: an opinion article. Front Med (Lausanne). 2023;10:1167033.
• Corinti F, Pontillo D, and Giansanti D. COVID-19 and the Infodemic: An Overview of the Role and Impact of Social Media, the Evolution of Medical Knowledge, and Emerging Problems. Healthcare (Basel). 2022;10(4)
• Farsi D. Social Media and Health Care, Part I: Literature Review of Social Media Use by Health Care Providers. J Med Internet Res. 2021;23(4):e23205.
• Lorenzo-Luaces L, Howard J, Edinger A, et al. Sociodemographics and Transdiagnostic Mental Health Symptoms in SOCIAL (Studies of Online Cohorts for Internalizing Symptoms and Language) I and II: Cross-sectional Survey and Botometer Analysis. JMIR Form Res. 2022;6(10):e39324.
• Denniss E and Lindberg R. Social media and the spread of misinformation: infectious and a threat to public health. Health Promot Int. 2025;40(2)
• Surani Z, Hirani R, Elias A, et al. Social media usage among health care providers. BMC Res Notes. 2017;10(1):654.
• Marsh H, Almekdash MH, Rossettie S, John A, Pelham K, and Magers B. Implications of Age on Social Media Utilization in Health Care Practice Development: Cross-sectional Survey Study. JMIR Hum Factors. 2021;8(3):e27528.
• Ghalavand H and Nabiolahi A. Exploring online health information quality criteria on social media: a mixed method approach. BMC Health Serv Res. 2024;24(1):1311.
• Ishikawa H, Miyawaki R, Kato M, Muilenburg JL, Tomar YA, and Kawamura Y. Digital health literacy and trust in health information sources: A comparative study of university students in Japan, the United States, and India. SSM Popul Health. 2025;31:101844.
• Roth-Cohen O, Levy S, and Zigdon A. The Mediated Role of Credibility on Information Sources and Patient Awareness toward Patient Rights. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021;18(16)
• Avram M, Micallef N, Patil S, et al. Exposure to social engagement metrics increases vulnerability to misinformation. The Harvard Kennedy School (HKS) Misinformation Review. 2020;1(5):1-11.
• Borges do Nascimento IJ, Pizarro AB, Almeida JM, et al. Infodemics and health misinformation: a systematic review of reviews. Bull World Health Organ. 2022;100(9):544-61.
• Ismail N, Kbaier D, Farrell T, and Kane A. The Experience of Health Professionals With Misinformation and Its Impact on Their Job Practice: Qualitative Interview Study. JMIR Form Res. 2022;6(11):e38794.
• Faihs V, Figalist C, Bossert E, Weimann K, Berberat PO, and Wijnen-Meijer M. Medical Students and Their Perceptions of Digital Medicine: a Question of Gender? Med Sci Educ. 2022;32(5):941-46.
• Vukusic Rukavina T, Viskic J, Machala Poplasen L, et al. Dangers and Benefits of Social Media on E-Professionalism of Health Care Professionals: Scoping Review. J Med Internet Res. 2021;23(11):e25770.
• O'Connor S, Zhang M, Honey M, and Lee JJ. Digital professionalism on social media: A narrative review of the medical, nursing, and allied health education literature. Int J Med Inform. 2021;153:104514.
• Kozuh I and Caks P. Social Media Fact-Checking: The Effects of News Literacy and News Trust on the Intent to Verify Health-Related Information. Healthcare (Basel). 2023;11(20)
• Lee DKL and Ramazan O. Fact-Checking of Health Information: The Effect of Media Literacy, Metacognition and Health Information Exposure. J Health Commun. 2021;26(7):491-500.
• Pearlman O, Konecny LT, and Cole M. Information literacy skills of health professions students in assessing YouTube medical education content. in Frontiers in Education. 2024. Frontiers Media SA.