Skip to main content
Hauptrubriken
CME Facharzt-Training Webinare Zeitschriften Bücher e.Medpedia Podcast
Service
Jobbörse Info & Hilfe
Fachgebiete
Anästhesiologie Allgemeinmedizin Arbeitsmedizin Augenheilkunde Chirurgie Dermatologie Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe HNO Innere Medizin Kardiologie Neurologie Onkologie und Hämatologie Orthopädie und Unfallchirurgie Pädiatrie Pathologie Psychiatrie Radiologie Rechtsmedizin Urologie Zahnmedizin
Themen
Klimawandel und Gesundheit Neues aus dem Markt COVID-19 Praxis und Beruf Seltene Erkrankungen GOÄ & EBM Panorama
Sammlungen
Kasuistiken Algorithmen & Infografiken Blickdiagnosen Arthropedia FlapFinder (für Dermatochirurgen) Videos Kongressberichterstattung Medizin für Apothekerinnen und Apotheker Für Ärztinnen und Ärzte in Weiterbildung Für Medizinstudierende
Erweiterte Suche
Anmelden
nach oben
Journal of Imaging Informatics in Medicine
Erschienen in: Journal of Digital Imaging 4/2020

21.04.2020 | Original Paper

Using Facebook Live to Advocate Breast Cancer Screening

verfasst von: Hilda H. Tso, Jay R. Parikh

Erschienen in: Journal of Imaging Informatics in Medicine | Ausgabe 4/2020

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

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.
Literatur
1.
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.CrossRef
3.
Kopans DB. Digital breast tomosynthesis from concept to clinical care. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2014;202:299–308.CrossRef
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.CrossRef
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.CrossRef
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.CrossRef
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.CrossRef
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.CrossRef
9.
Screening for breast cancer: U.S. Preventive services task force recommendation statement. Ann Intern Med. 2009;151:716–26, w-236.
10.
11.
12.
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.CrossRef
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.CrossRef
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.CrossRef
16.
Siu AL. Screening for breast cancer: U.S. Preventive services task force recommendation statement. Ann Intern Med. 2016;164:279–96.CrossRef
17.
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.CrossRef
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.CrossRef
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.CrossRef
22.
Berenbaum F. The social (media) side to rheumatology. Nat Rev Rheumatol. 2014;10:314–8.CrossRef
23.
Pathiraja F, Little D. Social media: The next frontier in radiology. Clin Radiol. 2015;70:585–7.CrossRef
24.
Eckler P, Worsowicz G, Rayburn JW. Social media and health care: An overview. Pm r. 2010;2:1046–50.CrossRef
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.PubMedPubMedCentral
26.
Ranschaert ER, van Ooijen PM, Lee S, Ratib O, Parizel PM. Social media for radiologists: An introduction. Insights Imaging. 2015;6:741–52.CrossRef
27.
Ventola CL. Social media and health care professionals: Benefits, risks, and best practices. P t. 2014;39:491–520.PubMedPubMedCentral
28.
29.
Tso HH, Parikh JR. Leveraging facebook to brand radiology. J Am Coll Radiol. 2018;15:1027–32.CrossRef
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.CrossRef
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.CrossRef
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.CrossRef
33.
Koontz NA, Kamer AP, Dodson SC, et al. Social media utilization at an academic radiology practice. Acad Radiol. 2018;25:111–17.CrossRef
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.CrossRef
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.CrossRef
36.
Crozier-Shaw G, Queally JM, Quinlan JF. Metal-on-metal total hip arthroplasty: Quality of online patient information. Orthopedics. 2017;40:e262–e68.CrossRef
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.CrossRef
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.CrossRef
39.
40.
41.
42.
43.
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.CrossRef
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.CrossRef
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
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.CrossRef
48.
49.
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.CrossRef
51.
52.
53.
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.CrossRef
55.
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.CrossRef
57.
58.
59.
60.
61.
Metadaten
Titel
Using Facebook Live to Advocate Breast Cancer Screening
verfasst von
Hilda H. Tso
Jay R. Parikh
Publikationsdatum
21.04.2020
Verlag
Springer International Publishing
Erschienen in
Journal of Imaging Informatics in Medicine / Ausgabe 4/2020
Print ISSN: 2948-2925
Elektronische ISSN: 2948-2933
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10278-020-00340-2

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 4/2020

Journal of Digital Imaging 4/2020 Zur Ausgabe

Original Paper

Natural Language Processing in Dutch Free Text Radiology Reports: Challenges in a Small Language Area Staging Pulmonary Oncology

Original Paper

Prediction of Non-small Cell Lung Cancer Histology by a Deep Ensemble of Convolutional and Bidirectional Recurrent Neural Network

Original Paper

Deep Convolutional Radiomic Features on Diffusion Tensor Images for Classification of Glioma Grades

Original Paper

Automatic Segmentation of Meniscus in Multispectral MRI Using Regions with Convolutional Neural Network (R-CNN)

Original Paper

Unlocking the PACS DICOM Domain for its Use in Clinical Research Data Warehouses

Original Paper

Framework for Extracting Critical Findings in Radiology Reports

Neu im Fachgebiet Radiologie

Akuter Schwindel: Wann lohnt sich eine MRT?

28.04.2024 Schwindel Nachrichten

Akuter Schwindel stellt oft eine diagnostische Herausforderung dar. Wie nützlich dabei eine MRT ist, hat eine Studie aus Finnland untersucht. Immerhin einer von sechs Patienten wurde mit akutem ischämischem Schlaganfall diagnostiziert.

Screening-Mammografie offenbart erhöhtes Herz-Kreislauf-Risiko

26.04.2024 Mammografie Nachrichten

Routinemäßige Mammografien helfen, Brustkrebs frühzeitig zu erkennen. Anhand der Röntgenuntersuchung lassen sich aber auch kardiovaskuläre Risikopatientinnen identifizieren. Als zuverlässiger Anhaltspunkt gilt die Verkalkung der Brustarterien.

S3-Leitlinie zu Pankreaskrebs aktualisiert

23.04.2024 Pankreaskarzinom Nachrichten

Die Empfehlungen zur Therapie des Pankreaskarzinoms wurden um zwei Off-Label-Anwendungen erweitert. Und auch im Bereich der Früherkennung gibt es Aktualisierungen.

Fünf Dinge, die im Kindernotfall besser zu unterlassen sind

18.04.2024 Pädiatrische Notfallmedizin Nachrichten

Im Choosing-Wisely-Programm, das für die deutsche Initiative „Klug entscheiden“ Pate gestanden hat, sind erstmals Empfehlungen zum Umgang mit Notfällen von Kindern erschienen. Fünf Dinge gilt es demnach zu vermeiden.

Update Radiologie

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.

Newsletter bestellen
Bildnachweise