Overview and characterization of penile cancer content across social media platforms

Ruben Alejandro Ortiz-Guerra; Salvador Jaime-Casas; Bertha Alejandra Martinez-Cannon; Jose C Ariza-Avila; Ana P González-Morales; Andrea Bardan-Duarte; Yuly A Remolina-Bonilla; Philippe E Spiess; Maria T Bourlon

doi:10.3389/fonc.2023.1301973

Overview and characterization of penile cancer content across social media platforms

Front Oncol. 2023 Dec 11:13:1301973. doi: 10.3389/fonc.2023.1301973. eCollection 2023.

Authors

Ruben Alejandro Ortiz-Guerra¹, Salvador Jaime-Casas¹, Bertha Alejandra Martinez-Cannon¹, Jose C Ariza-Avila², Ana P González-Morales², Andrea Bardan-Duarte², Yuly A Remolina-Bonilla¹, Philippe E Spiess³, Maria T Bourlon¹

Affiliations

¹ Department of Hematology and Oncology, Instituto Nacional de Ciencias Medicas y Nutricion Salvador Zubiran, Mexico City, Mexico.
² School of Medicine, Universidad Panamericana, Mexico City, Mexico.
³ Department of Genitourinary Oncology, Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, FL, United States.

Abstract

Background: Social media platforms (SMP) are an emerging resource that allows physicians, patients, and families to converse on cancer prevention, diagnosis, and treatment. We aimed to characterize penile cancer (PC) content shared on SMP.

Methods: We searched PC posts on Twitter, Facebook, and Instagram from July 1st, 2021, through June 30th, 2022. Two independent, blinded reviewers analyzed the hashtags: #PenileCancer, #PenileCancerAwareness, and #PenileNeoplasm. Descriptive statistics were used for posts characterization, Pearson´s correlation coefficient for associations, and Cohen's weighted kappa coefficient for inter-rater agreement rate.

Results: A total of 791 posts were analyzed, with Twitter accounting for 52%, Facebook for 12.2%, and Instagram for 35.5%, and. Most posts originated from high-income countries, such as the United Kingdom (48.8%). We found no correlation between the number of posts with PC incidence (p = 0.64) or users on SMP (p = 0.27). Most accounts were classified as "support and awareness communities" (43.6%) and "physicians and clinical researchers" (38.2%). Urology was the most common medical specialty to post (60.9%), followed by oncology (11.3%). Most posts were classified as "prevention and awareness for users" (45.1%). Global inter-reviewer agreement rate was almost perfect (k=0.95; p ≤ 0.01). On Twitter, "physicians and clinical researchers" shared more content on "treatment updates and medical papers published in medical journals," while on Facebook and Instagram, "support and awareness communities" focused on "personal and support comments."

Conclusion: Overall, the number of PC posts was low compared to other neoplasms across the SMP evaluated in this study. "Physicians and clinical researchers" shared more content on Twitter, while "support and awareness communities" on Facebook and Instagram. Encouraging the use of a common SMP among the medical community and general users could lead to a more effective communication between physicians, patients, and support groups, and to increased awareness of PC.

Keywords: content; penile cancer; platforms; posts; social media.

Grants and funding

The author(s) declare financial support was received for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article. We want to acknowledge the Aramont Foundation and Canales de Ayuda A.C. for the grant received for the Urologic Oncology Clinic at Instituto Nacional de Ciencias Médicas y Nutrición Salvador Zubirán that allowed this study to be carried out.