Keeping Patients Safe Online: A Study of Refractive Surgery Advertisements on Social Media.

Autor:	Tan EY; Orthopedics, Tan Tock Seng Hospital, Singapore, SGP., Tan Z; ENT, Northwick Park Hospital, London, GBR., Khaw JH; Faculty of Life Sciences and Medicine, King's College London, London, GBR., Mohamed R; Ophthalmology, Western Eye Hospital, London, GBR., Okonkwo A; Ophthalmology, Moorfields Eye Hospital, London, GBR., Petrushkin H; Ophthalmology, Moorfields Eye Hospital, London, GBR., Gore D; Ophthalmology, Moorfields Eye Hospital, London, GBR., Mohamed R; Faculty of Life Sciences and Medicine, King's College London, London, GBR.
Jazyk:	angličtina
Zdroj:	Cureus [Cureus] 2024 Sep 04; Vol. 16 (9), pp. e68643. Date of Electronic Publication: 2024 Sep 04 (Print Publication: 2024).
DOI:	10.7759/cureus.68643
Abstrakt:	Introduction Refractive error is the leading cause of visual impairment and blindness globally. Increasingly, patients are exposed to information about refractive surgery through social media advertisements. While national guidelines specify how refractive surgery should be advertised in traditional media, it is unclear to what extent these standards are adhered to in the emerging commercial arena of social media. The adherence of refractive surgery advertisements on social media to professional standards is poorly studied. Method We retrospectively analyzed the content of refractive surgery advertisements on the social media platform "TikTok," shown in the United Kingdom (UK) from October 2022 to October 2023, and compared them to the guidelines set out by The Royal College of Ophthalmologists (RCOphth) and the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA). Results We found that 39/51 (76%) of advertisements did not state the specific pathology to be corrected, and 41/51 (80%) did not specify a surgical procedure. Additionally, 33/51 (65%) of advertisements included at least one financial inducement, 44/51 (86%) contained misleading claims. None of the analyzed advertisements provided specific prices, offered refractive surgery as a competition prize, or featured celebrity endorsements. No medical jargon was found in any of the advertisements. The most viewed advertisement was seen by over 1.2 million unique users, with the median number of views for all advertisements being 34,000. Conclusion In conclusion, our analysis revealed that none of the refractive surgery advertisements on a popular social media platform met the standards set by RCOphth or ASA. This study presents the first qualitative analysis of social media refractive surgery advertisements, offering insights into what users can expect and providing recommendations for patients, doctors, social media platforms, and regulators to enhance refractive surgery advertising in the future. Competing Interests: Human subjects: All authors have confirmed that this study did not involve human participants or tissue. Animal subjects: All authors have confirmed that this study did not involve animal subjects or tissue. Conflicts of interest: In compliance with the ICMJE uniform disclosure form, all authors declare the following: Payment/services info: All authors have declared that no financial support was received from any organization for the submitted work. Financial relationships: All authors have declared that they have no financial relationships at present or within the previous three years with any organizations that might have an interest in the submitted work. Other relationships: All authors have declared that there are no other relationships or activities that could appear to have influenced the submitted work. (Copyright © 2024, Tan et al.)
Databáze:	MEDLINE
Externí odkaz:	Zobrazit plný text záznamu