PDF(Pubmed)
Abstract：
BACKGROUND: Dissemination of medical practice and scientific information through social media (SoMe) by clinicians and researchers is increasing. Broad exposure of information can promote connectivity within the scientific community, overcome barriers to access to sources, increase debate, and reveal layperson perspectives and preferences. On the other hand, practices lacking scientific evidence may also be promoted, laypeople may misunderstand the professional message, and clinician may suffer erosion of professional status. The aim of this project was to enhance awareness and advise the anesthesia community and clinicians at large about the potential risks advocate for responsible use of SoMe to disseminate information related to medical practices and knowledge.
METHODS: A modified Delphi process with prespecified consensus criteria was conducted among a multidisciplinary panel of experts, including anesthesiologists-intensivists, clinical psychologists, and forensic medicine specialists. Six items were identified: Ethics and deontological principles, the practice of sharing information via social media, legal aspects, psychological aspects, self-promotion, and criteria for appropriate dissemination. Statements and rationales were produced and subjected to blinded panelists\' votes. After reaching consensus, a document was written which then underwent external review by experts uninvolved in the consensus process. The project was promoted by the Italian Society of Anesthesia Analgesia Resuscitation and Intensive Care (SIAARTI).
RESULTS: Twelve statements were produced, and consensus was achieved for all. The panel concluded that the general principles guiding dissemination of professional information via SoMe must remain in line with the general principles of ethics, deontology, and scientific validity that guide the medical profession and science in general. Professional equity must be maintained while communicating via SoMe. Medical practices lacking support by scientific evidence should not be disseminated. Patients\' informed consent must be obtained before dissemination of information, images, or data. Self-promotion must not be prioritized over any of these principles.
CONCLUSIONS: When sharing medical practices and scientific information on SoMe, healthcare professionals are advised to act conscientiously and ethically. Local regulations should be adhered to. Institutional training on the potential risks and proper of SoMe for such purpose may contribute to preservation of professional integrity.
METHODS: A modified Delphi process with prespecified consensus criteria was conducted among a multidisciplinary panel of experts, including anesthesiologists-intensivists, clinical psychologists, and forensic medicine specialists. Six items were identified: Ethics and deontological principles, the practice of sharing information via social media, legal aspects, psychological aspects, self-promotion, and criteria for appropriate dissemination. Statements and rationales were produced and subjected to blinded panelists\' votes. After reaching consensus, a document was written which then underwent external review by experts uninvolved in the consensus process. The project was promoted by the Italian Society of Anesthesia Analgesia Resuscitation and Intensive Care (SIAARTI).
RESULTS: Twelve statements were produced, and consensus was achieved for all. The panel concluded that the general principles guiding dissemination of professional information via SoMe must remain in line with the general principles of ethics, deontology, and scientific validity that guide the medical profession and science in general. Professional equity must be maintained while communicating via SoMe. Medical practices lacking support by scientific evidence should not be disseminated. Patients\' informed consent must be obtained before dissemination of information, images, or data. Self-promotion must not be prioritized over any of these principles.
CONCLUSIONS: When sharing medical practices and scientific information on SoMe, healthcare professionals are advised to act conscientiously and ethically. Local regulations should be adhered to. Institutional training on the potential risks and proper of SoMe for such purpose may contribute to preservation of professional integrity.
摘要：
背景：临床医生和研究人员通过社交媒体（SoMe）传播医疗实践和科学信息正在增加。广泛的信息暴露可以促进科学界内部的联系，克服获取来源的障碍，增加辩论,并揭示外行人的观点和偏好。另一方面,缺乏科学证据的做法也可能得到推广，外行人可能会误解专业信息，临床医生可能会受到职业地位的侵蚀。该项目的目的是提高认识，并向麻醉界和广大临床医生提供有关潜在风险的建议，倡导负责任地使用SoMe来传播与医疗实践和知识有关的信息。
方法：在多学科专家小组中进行了具有预定共识标准的改良Delphi过程，包括麻醉师-重症医师，临床心理学家,和法医学专家。确定了六个项目：伦理学和道义学原则，通过社交媒体分享信息的做法，法律方面，心理方面，自我推销,和适当传播的标准。陈述和理由被制作出来，并受到小组成员的盲目投票。达成共识后,编写了一份文件，然后由不参与共识进程的专家进行外部审查。该项目由意大利麻醉镇痛复苏和重症监护协会（SIAARTI）推广。
结果：产生了12份声明，所有人都达成了共识。小组的结论是，指导通过SoMe传播专业信息的一般原则必须与道德的一般原则保持一致，道义,和科学有效性，指导医学专业和一般科学。在通过SoMe进行沟通时，必须保持专业公平。不应传播缺乏科学证据支持的医疗实践。在传播信息之前必须获得患者的知情同意，images,或数据。自我推销不能优先于任何这些原则。
结论：在分享关于SoMe的医疗实践和科学信息时，建议医疗保健专业人员认真和道德地行事。应遵守地方性法规。关于SoMe为此目的的潜在风险和适当性的机构培训可能有助于维护专业诚信。
方法：在多学科专家小组中进行了具有预定共识标准的改良Delphi过程，包括麻醉师-重症医师，临床心理学家,和法医学专家。确定了六个项目：伦理学和道义学原则，通过社交媒体分享信息的做法，法律方面，心理方面，自我推销,和适当传播的标准。陈述和理由被制作出来，并受到小组成员的盲目投票。达成共识后,编写了一份文件，然后由不参与共识进程的专家进行外部审查。该项目由意大利麻醉镇痛复苏和重症监护协会（SIAARTI）推广。
结果：产生了12份声明，所有人都达成了共识。小组的结论是，指导通过SoMe传播专业信息的一般原则必须与道德的一般原则保持一致，道义,和科学有效性，指导医学专业和一般科学。在通过SoMe进行沟通时，必须保持专业公平。不应传播缺乏科学证据支持的医疗实践。在传播信息之前必须获得患者的知情同意，images,或数据。自我推销不能优先于任何这些原则。
结论：在分享关于SoMe的医疗实践和科学信息时，建议医疗保健专业人员认真和道德地行事。应遵守地方性法规。关于SoMe为此目的的潜在风险和适当性的机构培训可能有助于维护专业诚信。
