Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Using Facebook Live to Advocate Breast Cancer Screening

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Journal of Digital Imaging Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

With current conflicting and confusing screening mammography guidelines between major medical organizations, radiologists have an opportunity to educate and advocate for patients using the power of social media. The authors provide a brief overview on the impact of social media in radiology, in particular Facebook, as well as challenges encountered by radiologists as they establish an online presence, and how to effectively use Facebook Live to advocate for screening mammography.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. U.S. Breast cancer statistics. 2019; https://www.breastcancer.org/symptoms/understand_bc/statistics. Accessed October 12, 2019.

  2. Monticciolo DL, Newell MS, Hendrick RE, et al. Breast cancer screening for average-risk women: Recommendations from the acr commission on breast imaging. J Am Coll Radiol. 2017;14:1137–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Kopans DB. Digital breast tomosynthesis from concept to clinical care. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2014;202:299–308.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Saadatmand S, Bretveld R, Siesling S, Tilanus-Linthorst MM. Influence of tumour stage at breast cancer detection on survival in modern times: Population based study in 173,797 patients. Bmj. 2015;351:h4901.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Mariotto AB, Zou Z, Zhang F, Howlader N, Kurian AW, Etzioni R. Can we use survival data from cancer registries to learn about disease recurrence? The case of breast cancer. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2018;27:1332–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Spillane AJ, Kennedy CW, Gillett DJ, et al. Screen-detected breast cancer compared to symptomatic presentation: An analysis of surgical treatment and end-points of effective mammographic screening. ANZ J Surg. 2001;71:398–402.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Malmgren JA, Parikh J, Atwood MK, Kaplan HG. Impact of mammography detection on the course of breast cancer in women aged 40-49 years. Radiology. 2012;262:797–806.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Malmgren JA, Parikh J, Atwood MK, Kaplan HG. Improved prognosis of women aged 75 and older with mammography-detected breast cancer. Radiology. 2014;273:686–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Screening for breast cancer: U.S. Preventive services task force recommendation statement. Ann Intern Med. 2009;151:716–26, w-236.

  10. Mammography screening: Facts and figures. 2019; https://www.sbi-online.org/endtheconfusion/FactsFigures.aspx. Accessed October 12, 2019.

  11. American cancer society breast cancer screening guideline. 2019; https://www.cancer.org/latest-news/special-coverage/american-cancer-society-breast-cancer-screening-guidelines.html. Accessed October 12, 2019.

  12. Acog revises breast cancer screening guidance: Ob-gyns promote shared decision making. 2017; https://www.acog.org/About-ACOG/News-Room/News-Releases/2017/ACOG-Revises-Breast-Cancer-Screening-Guidance%2D%2DObGyns-Promote-Shared-Decision-Making?IsMobileSet=false. Accessed October 12, 2019.

  13. Boroumand G, Teberian I, Parker L, Rao VM, Levin DC. Screening mammography and digital breast tomosynthesis: Utilization updates. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2018;210:1092–96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Jiang M, Hughes DR, Duszak R, Jr. Screening mammography rates in the medicare population before and after the 2009 U.S. Preventive services task force guideline change: An interrupted time series analysis. Womens Health Issues. 2015;25:239–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Sharpe RE, Jr., Levin DC, Parker L, Rao VM. The effect of the controversial us preventive services task force recommendations on the use of screening mammography. J Am Coll Radiol. 2016;13:e58–e61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Siu AL. Screening for breast cancer: U.S. Preventive services task force recommendation statement. Ann Intern Med. 2016;164:279–96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. New acr and sbi breast cancer screening guidelines call for significant changes to screening process. 2018; https://www.acr.org/Media-Center/ACR-News-Releases/2018/New-ACR-and-SBI-Breast-Cancer-Screening-Guidelines-Call-for-Significant-Changes-to-Screening-Process. Accessed October 12, 2019.

  18. Squiers LB, Holden DJ, Dolina SE, Kim AE, Bann CM, Renaud JM. The public’s response to the U.S. Preventive services task force’s 2009 recommendations on mammography screening. Am J Prev Med. 2011;40:497–504.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Haas JS, Sprague BL, Klabunde CN, et al. Provider attitudes and screening practices following changes in breast and cervical cancer screening guidelines. J Gen Intern Med. 2016;31:52–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Schattner E. Correcting a decade of negative news about mammography. Clin Imaging. 2019.

  21. Fedewa SA, de Moor JS, Ward EM, et al. Mammography use and physician recommendation after the 2009 U.S. Preventive services task force breast cancer screening recommendations. Am J Prev Med. 2016;50:e123–e31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Berenbaum F. The social (media) side to rheumatology. Nat Rev Rheumatol. 2014;10:314–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Pathiraja F, Little D. Social media: The next frontier in radiology. Clin Radiol. 2015;70:585–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Eckler P, Worsowicz G, Rayburn JW. Social media and health care: An overview. Pm r. 2010;2:1046–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Kassamali RH, Palkhi EY, Hoey ET. Social media in clinical radiology: Have you updated your status? Quant Imaging Med Surg. 2015;5:491–3.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  26. Ranschaert ER, van Ooijen PM, Lee S, Ratib O, Parizel PM. Social media for radiologists: An introduction. Insights Imaging. 2015;6:741–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Ventola CL. Social media and health care professionals: Benefits, risks, and best practices. P t. 2014;39:491–520.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  28. Pew Research Center. A shifting landscape. 2009; https://www.pewinternet.org/2009/06/11/a-shifting-landscape/. Accessed October 12, 2019.

  29. Tso HH, Parikh JR. Leveraging facebook to brand radiology. J Am Coll Radiol. 2018;15:1027–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Seidel RL, Jalilvand A, Kunjummen J, Gilliland L, Duszak R, Jr. Radiologists and social media: Do not forget about facebook. J Am Coll Radiol. 2018;15:224–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Prabhu V, Rosenkrantz AB. Enriched audience engagement through twitter: Should more academic radiology departments seize the opportunity? J Am Coll Radiol. 2015;12:756–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Tunnecliff J, Ilic D, Morgan P, et al. The acceptability among health researchers and clinicians of social media to translate research evidence to clinical practice: Mixed-methods survey and interview study. J Med Internet Res. 2015;17:e119.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Koontz NA, Kamer AP, Dodson SC, et al. Social media utilization at an academic radiology practice. Acad Radiol. 2018;25:111–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Patel SS, Hawkins CM, Rawson JV, Hoang JK. Professional social networking in radiology: Who is there and what are they doing? Acad Radiol. 2017;24:574–79.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Nastasi A, Bryant T, Canner JK, Dredze M, Camp MS, Nagarajan N. Breast cancer screening and social media: A content analysis of evidence use and guideline opinions on twitter. J Cancer Educ. 2018;33:695–702.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Crozier-Shaw G, Queally JM, Quinlan JF. Metal-on-metal total hip arthroplasty: Quality of online patient information. Orthopedics. 2017;40:e262–e68.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Burgess JD, Cameron CM, Cuttle L, Tyack Z, Kimble RM. Inaccurate, inadequate and inconsistent: A content analysis of burn first aid information online. Burns. 2016;42:1671–77.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Kotsenas AL, Arce M, Aase L, Timimi FK, Young C, Wald JT. The strategic imperative for the use of social media in health care. J Am Coll Radiol. 2018;15:155–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Pew Research Center. The social life of health information. 2019; https://www.pewinternet.org/2009/06/11/the-social-life-of-health-information/. Accessed Otober 12, 2019.

  40. Kallas P. Top 15 most popular social networking sites and apps [2019]. 2019; https://www.dreamgrow.com/top-15-most-popular-social-networking-sites/. Accessed October 12, 2019.

  41. Perrin A, Anderson M. Share of U.S. Adults using social media, including facebook, is mostly unchanged since 2018. 2019; https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/04/10/share-of-u-s-adults-using-social-media-including-facebook-is-mostly-unchanged-since-2018/. Accessed October 25, 2019.

  42. Shearer E, Grieco E. Americans are wary of the role social media sites play in delivering the news. 2019; https://www.journalism.org/2019/10/02/americans-are-wary-of-the-role-social-media-sites-play-in-delivering-the-news/. Accessed October 12, 2019.

  43. Physicians on facebook 2019; https://www.mdsearch.com/physician-careers/physicians-on-facebook. Accessed October 25, 2019.

  44. Bender JL, Jimenez-Marroquin MC, Jadad AR. Seeking support on facebook: A content analysis of breast cancer groups. J Med Internet Res. 2011;13:e16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Doyle RJ, Wang N, Anthony D, Borkan J, Shield RR, Goldman RE. Computers in the examination room and the electronic health record: Physicians’ perceived impact on clinical encounters before and after full installation and implementation. Fam Pract. 2012;29:601–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Pirtle CJ, Reeder RR, Lehmann CU, Unertl KM, Lorenzi NM. Physician perspectives on training for an ehr implementation. Stud Health Technol Inform. 2019;264:1318–22.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Kotsenas AL, Aase L, Arce M, et al. The social media DNA of mayo clinic-and health care. J Am Coll Radiol. 2018;15:162–66.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center. Community guidelines. 2019; https://www.mdanderson.org/about-md-anderson/business-legal/legal-and-policy/legal-statements/privacy-policy/community-guidelines.html. Accessed October 25, 2019.

  49. American College of Radiology. Acr social media. https://www.acr.org/media-center/social-media. Accessed October 12, 2019.

  50. Cabrera D, Roy D, Chisolm MS. Social media scholarship and alternative metrics for academic promotion and tenure. J Am Coll Radiol. 2018;15:135–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. U.S. Department of Health & Human Services. Hipaa guidance materials. https://www.hhs.gov/hipaa/for-professionals/privacy/guidance/index.html. Accessed October 25, 2019.

  52. HIPAA Journal. Facebook makes changes to health support groups to better protect users’ privacy. 2019; https://www.hipaajournal.com/facebook-makes-changes-to-health-support-groups-to-better-protect-users-privacy/. Accessed October 25, 2019.

  53. We adhere to the highest security standards. 2019; https://www.facebook.com/workplace/security, October 12, 2019.

  54. Ranschaert ER, Van Ooijen PM, McGinty GB, Parizel PM. Radiologists’ usage of social media: Results of the ransom survey. J Digit Imaging. 2016;29:443–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Facebook pages: Create a beautiful online home for your business. 2019; https://www.facebook.com/business/pages. Accessed October 25, 2019.

  56. Shanafelt TD, Hasan O, Dyrbye LN, et al. Changes in burnout and satisfaction with work-life balance in physicians and the general us working population between 2011 and 2014. Mayo Clin Proc. 2015;90:1600–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Hootsuite. Hootsuite for health care: The health care industry’s leading social media management platform. 2019; https://hootsuite.com/industries/health-care. Accessed October 25, 2019.

  58. Lua A. The 25 top social media management tools for businesses of all sizes. 2109; https://buffer.com/library/social-media-management-tools. Accessed October 25, 2019.

  59. Facebook live video: The complete guide to live-streaming for business. 2018; https://blog.hootsuite.com/facebook-live-video/. Accessed October 12, 2019.

  60. Tips for using facebook live. 2017; https://www.facebook.com/facebookmedia/blog/tips-for-using-live. Accessed October 12, 2019.

  61. Use live with to create a two-person broadcast. 2019; https://www.facebook.com/help/publisher/616974845361238. Accessed October 12, 2019.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Breast Imaging, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1515 Holcombe Blvd., CPB5.3208, Houston, TX, 77030, USA

    Hilda H. Tso & Jay R. Parikh

Authors
  1. Hilda H. Tso
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jay R. Parikh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Hilda H. Tso.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Tso, H.H., Parikh, J.R. Using Facebook Live to Advocate Breast Cancer Screening. J Digit Imaging 33, 1047–1052 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10278-020-00340-2

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10278-020-00340-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation