Communicating Genetics and Smoking Through Social Media: Are We There Yet?

Background Social media is a recent source of health information that could disseminate new scientific research, such as the genetics of smoking. Objective The objectives were (1) to evaluate the availability of genetic information about smoking on different social media platforms (ie, YouTube, Facebook, and Twitter) and (2) to assess the type and the content of the information displayed on the social media as well as the profile of people publishing this information. Methods We screened posts on YouTube, Facebook, and Twitter with the terms “smoking” and “genetic” at two time points (September 18, 2012, and May 7, 2013). The first 100 posts were reviewed for each media for the time points. Google was searched during Time 2 as an indicator of available information on the Web and the other social media that discussed genetics and smoking. The source of information, the country of the publisher, characteristics of the posts, and content of the posts were extracted. Results On YouTube, Facebook, and Twitter, 31, 0, and 84 posts, respectively, were included. Posts were mostly based on smoking-related diseases, referred to scientific publications, and were largely from the United States. From the Google search, most results were scientific databases. Six scientific publications referred to within the Google search were also retrieved on either YouTube or Twitter. Conclusions Despite the importance of public understanding of smoking and genetics, and the high use of social media, little information on this topic is actually present on social media. Therefore, there is a need to monitor the information that is there and to evaluate the population’s understanding of the information related to genetics and smoking that is displayed on social media.

[1]  J. Klein,et al.  Exposure to Tobacco on the Internet: Content Analysis of Adolescents' Internet Use , 2009, Pediatrics.

[2]  M. Khoury,et al.  Implications of Internet Availability of Genomic Information for Public Health Practice , 2012, Public Health Genomics.

[3]  A. Brand,et al.  European Best Practice Guidelines for Quality Assurance, Provision and Use of Genome-based Information and Technologies: the 2012 Declaration of Rome , 2012, Drug metabolism and drug interactions.

[4]  Alain Dagher,et al.  Genetic variation in CYP2A6 predicts neural reactivity to smoking cues as measured using fMRI , 2012, NeuroImage.

[5]  H. Goldman,et al.  Social networks lack useful content for incontinence. , 2011, Urology.

[6]  G. Mills,et al.  Genome-wide association scan of tag SNPs identifies a susceptibility locus for lung cancer at 15q25.1 , 2008, Nature Genetics.

[7]  D. Belsky,et al.  Polygenic risk and the developmental progression to heavy, persistent smoking and nicotine dependence: evidence from a 4-decade longitudinal study. , 2013, JAMA psychiatry.

[8]  D. Bianchi,et al.  The Role of Social Networking Sites in Medical Genetics Research , 2013, American journal of medical genetics. Part A.

[9]  A. Lucia,et al.  ‘Smoking Genes’: A Genetic Association Study , 2011, PloS one.

[10]  S. Chapman,et al.  Tobacco control advocacy in the age of social media: using Facebook, Twitter and Change , 2012, Tobacco Control.

[11]  K. Patrick,et al.  Future health applications of genomics: priorities for communication, behavioral, and social sciences research. , 2010, American journal of preventive medicine.

[12]  Becky Freeman,et al.  New media and tobacco control , 2012, Tobacco Control.

[13]  J. Wardle,et al.  Knowledge of lung cancer symptoms and risk factors in the UK: development of a measure and results from a population-based survey , 2012, Thorax.

[14]  Li Ding,et al.  Genomic Landscape of Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer in Smokers and Never-Smokers , 2012, Cell.