Patterns of social media use and associations with psychosocial outcomes among breast and gynecologic cancer survivors

Abstract

Purpose

We sought to characterize the use of social media (SM) among breast and gynecologic cancer survivors, as well as associations between patterns of SM use and psychosocial outcomes.

Methods

Two hundred seventy-three breast and gynecologic cancer survivors recruited at the Stanford Women’s Cancer Center completed the study. Participants completed questionnaires to measure quality of life (FACT-G), functional social support (Duke-UNC FSSQ), distress (PHQ-4), decision regret (DRS), and SM use.

Results

In total, 75.8% of the sample reported using SM. There was no difference in quality of life (QOL), functional social support (FSS), distress, or decision regret between SM users and non-users. SM users indicated using SM for social support (34.3%) and loneliness (24.6%) more than for information-seeking (15.9%), coping (18.8%), or self-disclosure (14%). SM use for coping was associated with lower QOL (p < .001), lower FSS (p < .001), and higher decision regret (p = .029). Use for social support was associated with lower FSS (p = .029). Use for information seeking was associated with lower QOL (p = .012). Use of SM when lonely was associated with lower QOL (p < .001), higher distress (p = .007), lower FSS (p < .001), and higher decision regret (p = .020).

Conclusions

Associations between SM use and psychosocial outcomes are nuanced and dependent on motivation for use. Further research is needed to better characterize SM use and associations with psychosocial outcomes among cancer survivors.

Implications for Cancer Survivors

SM is an important potential avenue for understanding and addressing the psychosocial effects associated with cancer survivorship.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1

References

  1. 1.

    Demographics of social media users and adoption in the United States. Retrieved from https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/fact-sheet/social-media/

  2. 2.

    Pantic I. Online social networking and mental health. Cyberpsychol Behav Soc Netw. 2014;17(10):652–7. https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2014.0070.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  3. 3.

    Seabrook EM, Kern ML, Rickard NS. Social networking sites, depression, and anxiety: a systematic review. JMIR Ment Health. 2016;3(4):e50. https://doi.org/10.2196/mental.5842.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. 4.

    Stronge S, Mok T, Ejova A, Lee C, Zubielevitch E, Yogeeswaran K, et al. Social media use is (weakly) related to psychological distress. Cyberpsychol Behav Soc Netw. 2019;22(9):604–9. https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2019.0176.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. 5.

    Baker DA, Algorta GP. The relationship between online social networking and depression: a systematic review of quantitative studies. Cyberpsychol Behav Soc Netw. 2016;19(11):638–48. https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2016.0206.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. 6.

    Huang C. Time spent on social network sites and psychological well-being: a meta-analysis. Cyberpsychol Behav Soc Netw. 2017;20(6):346–54. https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2016.0758.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. 7.

    Grassi L, Spiegel D, Riba M. Advancing psychosocial care in cancer patients. F1000Research. 2017;6:2083. https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.11902.1.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. 8.

    Merolli M, Gray K, Martin-Sanchez F. Health outcomes and related effects of using social media in chronic disease management: a literature review and analysis of affordances. J Biomed Inform. 2013;46(6):957–69. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbi.2013.04.010.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. 9.

    Koskan A, Klasko L, Davis SN, Gwede CK, Wells KJ, Kumar A, et al. Use and taxonomy of social media in cancer-related research: a systematic review. Am J Public Health. 2014;104(7):e20–37. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2014.301980.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  10. 10.

    Falisi AL, Wiseman KP, Gaysynsky A, Scheideler JK, Ramin DA, Chou W, et al. Social media for breast cancer survivors: a literature review. J Cancer Surviv. 2017;11(6):808–21. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11764-017-0620-5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. 11.

    Corter AL, Speller B, Sequeira S, Campbell C, Facey M, Baxter NN. What young women with breast cancer get versus what they want in online information and social media supports. J Adolesc Young Adult Oncol. 2019;8(3):320–8. https://doi.org/10.1089/jayao.2018.0125.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. 12.

    Namkoong K, Mclaughlin B, Yoo W, Hull SJ, Shah DV, Kim SC, et al. The effects of expression: how providing emotional support online improves cancer patients’ coping strategies. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr. 2013;2013(47):169–74. https://doi.org/10.1093/jncimonographs/lgt033.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  13. 13.

    Bender JL, Jimenez-Marroquin MC, Jadad AR. Seeking support on Facebook: a content analysis of breast cancer groups. J Med Internet Res. 2011;13(1):e16. https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.1560.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. 14.

    Wallner LP, Martinez KA, Li Y, Jagsi R, Janz NK, Katz SJ, et al. Use of online communication by patients with newly diagnosed breast cancer during the treatment decision process. JAMA Oncol. 2016;2(12):1654–6. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamaoncol.2016.2070.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. 15.

    Eenbergen MCV, Poll-Franse LVVD, Heine P, Mols F. The impact of participation in online cancer communities on patient reported outcomes: systematic review. JMIR Cancer. 2017;3(2):e15. https://doi.org/10.2196/cancer.7312.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. 16.

    Stanton AL, Thompson EH, Crespi CM, Link JS, Waisman JR. Project connect online: randomized trial of an internet-based program to chronicle the cancer experience and facilitate communication. J Clin Oncol. 2013;31(27):3411–7. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2012.46.9015.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. 17.

    Brucker PS, Yost K, Cashy J, Webster K, Cella D. General population and cancer patient norms for the functional assessment of cancer therapy-general (FACT-G). Eval Health Prof. 2005;28(2):192–211. https://doi.org/10.1177/0163278705275341.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. 18.

    Broadhead W, Gehlbach S, De Gruy F, Kaplan B. The Duke-UNC functional social support questionnaire: measurement of social support in family medicine patients. Med Care. 1988;26(7):709–23. https://doi.org/10.1097/00005650-198807000-00006.

  19. 19.

    Löwe B, Wahl I, Rose M, Spitzer C, Glaesmer H, Wingenfeld K, et al. A 4-item measure of depression and anxiety: validation and standardization of the Patient Health Questionnaire-4 (PHQ-4) in the general population. J Affect Disord. 2010;122(1–2):86–95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2009.06.019.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  20. 20.

    Brehaut JC, Oconnor AM, Wood TJ, Hack TF, Siminoff L, Gordon E, et al. Validation of a decision regret scale. Med Decis Mak. 2003;23(4):281–92. https://doi.org/10.1177/0272989x03256005.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. 21.

    Sigerson L, Cheng C. Scales for measuring user engagement with social network sites: a systematic review of psychometric properties. Comput Hum Behav. 2018;83:87–105. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2018.01.023.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. 22.

    Attai DJ, Cowher MS, Al-Hamadani M, Schoger JM, Staley AC, Landercasper J. Twitter social media is an effective tool for breast cancer patient education and support: patient-reported outcomes by survey. J Med Internet Res. 2015;17(7):e188. https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.4721.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  23. 23.

    Høybye MT, Dalton SO, Deltour I, Bidstrup PE, Frederiksen K, Johansen C. Effect of Internet peer-support groups on psychosocial adjustment to cancer: a randomised study. Br. J. Cancer. 2010;102(9):1348–54. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bjc.6605646.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  24. 24.

    Montazeri A. Health-related quality of life in breast cancer patients: a bibliographic review of the literature from 1974 to 2007. J Exp Clin Cancer Res. 2008;27(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/1756-9966-27-32.

  25. 25.

    Yoo GJ, Levine EG, Aviv C, Ewing C, Au A. Older women, breast cancer, and social support. Support Care Cancer. 2009;18(12):1521–30. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-009-0774-4.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  26. 26.

    Mikal JP, Beckstrand MJ, Parks E, Oyenuga M, Odebunmi T, Okedele O, et al. Online social support among breast cancer patients: longitudinal changes to Facebook use following breast cancer diagnosis and transition off therapy. J Cancer Surviv. 2020;14:322–30. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11764-019-00847-w.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. 27.

    Carlson L, Zelinski E, Toivonen K, Sundstrom L, Jobin C, Damaskos P, et al. Prevalence of psychosocial distress in cancer patients across 55 North American cancer centers. J Psychosoc Oncol. 2019;37(1):5–21. https://doi.org/10.1080/07347332.2018.1521490.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. 28.

    Leinert E, Kreienberg R, Wöckel A, Kühn T, Flock F, Felberbaum R, et al. Survivors of primary breast cancer 5 years after surgery: follow-up care, long-term problems, and treatment regrets. Results of the prospective BRENDA II-study. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2020;301(3):761–7. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-020-05437-1.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. 29.

    Reyna VF, Nelson WL, Han PK, Pignone MP. Decision making and cancer. Am Psychol. 2015;70(2):105–18. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0036834.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We would like to acknowledge Mallory Cases, Ph.D., M.P.H., for her valuable contributions to the study.

Funding

The study was funded via the Stanford Cancer Innovation Award 2018, NCI R01CA181659 and NCI R01CA239714.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Contributions

Conceptualization: Oxana Palesh, Lidia Schapira, Allison Kurian, and Jonathan S. Berek.

Data collection: Oxana Palesh, Elisa Hofmeister, and Sophie Fisher.

Analysis: Leah Tolby and Oxana Palesh.

Interpretation of data: Leah Tolby, Sabrina Chao, Elisa Hofmeister, and Sophie Fisher.

Manuscript writing: Leah Tolby, Oxana Palesh, and Catherine Benedict.

Manuscript editing and review: All authors.

All authors read and approved final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Oxana G. Palesh.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Informed consent

All participants provided informed consent, and the study received Stanford IRB Approval.

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

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Tolby, L.T., Hofmeister, E.N., Fisher, S. et al. Patterns of social media use and associations with psychosocial outcomes among breast and gynecologic cancer survivors. J Cancer Surviv (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11764-020-00959-8

Download citation

Keywords

  • Social media
  • Cancer survivors
  • Distress
  • Social support
  • Quality of life
  • Decision regret