Maria Lapuente, member of EONS communication working group, examines the impact of social media on cancer patients and highlights the vital role nurses play in supporting patients and caregivers as they navigate these platforms. She emphasises the importance of ensuring patients remain well-informed and the need for oncology nurses to stay up to date with emerging data to provide effective guidance.
Social media (SoMe) is currently used by billions of people across the world, (Arani and Raldow, 2025; Siew et al., 2022; Wu, 2025) and its usage continues to grow (Wu, 2025). This surge in SoMe use is also reflected in the cancer community as a new way of communication (Sedrak et al., 2018). After a cancer diagnosis (Braun et al., 2019; Fridman, Bylund and Elston Lafata, 2024), patients and their relatives often seek out these platforms to connect with others in similar circumstances, whether driven by psychological distress (Bender et al., 2021) or a reduced quality of life (Lazard et al., 2021).
While SoMe can connect, help, and improve cancer patients’ quality of life (Bouchard et al., 2019; Han, Lee, Demeris, 2018; Siew et al., 2022; Wu, 2025), as well as help to destigmatise cancer (Shrivastava, Bobhate, and Bandre, 2025), these benefits can be undermined by the spread of false information and harmful practice (Arani and Raldow, 2025; Gonzalves et al., 2025; Loeb et al., 2024).
The demographics of cancer patients on SoMe are complex and sometimes contradictory. According to Bender et al. (2021) and Wu QL (2025) users are typically highly educated, white, young, and female. However, these findings contrast with those of Fridman et al. (2024), and Lazar et al. (2023), who identified young patients of black and Hispanic backgrounds, and those with low education levels, as more prone to use SoMe.
The main cancer-related topics shared and disseminated online include prevention (Han, Lee, and Demiris, 2018), health services, side effects (Gage-Bouchard et al., 2019), and alternative and natural remedies (Lazard et al., 2023; Zenone et al., 2023). Despite some of the content being reliable (Gage-Bouchard et al., 2019), these platforms host a significant quantity of inaccurate cancer material (Gonzalves et al., 2025), a problem that is particularly pronounced when compared to other topics such as surgical or dental information (Suarez-Lledo and Alvarez-Galvez, 2021). Moreover, the information is not always tailored to a specific diagnosis and does not always consider patient demographics (Shrivastava et al., 2025). Consequently, assessing the source ’s reliability can be challenging for some users (Wang et al.,2019).
Despite these limitations, there are studies showing that some patients can identify misleading information on SoMe (Braun et al, 2019, Wu QL. 2025). In contrast, Lazar et al (2023) carried out a study that showed that more than half of their participants believed the cancer misinformation they encountered.
The research highlights that those from a high educational level background prefer to verify the online information found on SoMe with their clinical team (Braun et al., 2019; Wu, 2025). On the contrary, patients with lower educational levels are more likely to base their decisions on the information seen on SoMe without seeking medical support (Fridman et al., 2024; Han et al., 2018; Wu, 2025) as they feel uncomfortable discussing information with their medical team (Fridman et al., 2024). Collectively, these results emphasise the significant role of SoMe in patient decision-making (Gonzalves et al., 2025).
However, these findings must be considered alongside a clear lack of diverse representation in the evidence base, as most studies involved only women, highly educated individuals, and white participants (Braun et al., 2019; Han et al., 2018; Wu QL, 2025). This limits generalisability significantly, because those at higher risk of believing misinformation are often less educated, or from other backgrounds (Fridman et al., 2024; Han et al., 2018; Wu, 2025). In addition, older adults are rarely included in the data (Gonzalves et al., 2025; Han et al., 2018).
Methodologically, the evidence on this topic relies mostly on subjective data from surveys (Fridan et al., 2024; Han et al., 2018; Lazard et al., 2023) and interviews (Lazard et al., 2021) rather than on more rigorous methods such as randomised controlled studies (Siew et al., 2022)
Considering these challenges, the role of the oncology nurse is clear. Oncology nurses can empower, instruct, and guide patients when handling online information. They can proactively teach and signpost them to use credible resources to improve their safety and to reduce their anxiety. This is especially important given that the literature clearly shows many patients hesitate to discuss what they find online with their medical team.
Ultimately, SoMe is an effective instrument that should be integrated as part of the cancer care resources. It is a key tool to support patients in decision-making, to create a feeling of community, and to enhance the psychological wellbeing of cancer patients. However, its utility is compromised by the shared misinformation. Critically, some patients will not discuss the information they encounter with their medical team, an issue that can impact directly their decision-making. Therefore, oncology nurses must continue to advance their expertise to assist patients in navigating these platforms safely and to encourage genuinely informed decision-making.
References:
- Ariani, R.T. and Raldow A.C. (2025) Impact of social media on Oncology Care. Hematology/Oncology Clinics of North America. Vol 39, Issue 2, pp 413-429, DOI: 10.1016/j.hoc.2024.12.001.
- Bender JL, Hueniken K, Eng L, Brown MC, Kassirian S, Geist I, Balaratnam K, Liang M, Paulo CB, Geist A, Rao P, Magony A, Smith EC, Xu W, Liu G, Gupta AA. (2021) Internet and social media use in cancer patients: association with distress and perceived benefits and limitations. Support Care Cancer. Vol. 29(9) pp: 5273-5281. DOI: 10.1007/s00520-021-
- Braun LA, Zomorodbakhsch B, Keinki C, Huebner J. (2019) Information needs, communication and usage of social media by cancer patients and their relatives. Journal of Cancer Research Clinical Oncology.Vol 145(7):1865-1875. DOI: 10.1007/s00432-019-02929-9
- Fridman I, Boyles D, Chheda R, Baldwin-SoRelle C, Smith AB, Elston Lafata J. (2025) Identifying Misinformation About Unproven Cancer Treatments on social media Using User-Friendly Linguistic Characteristics: Content Analysis. Journal of Medical Internet Research Infodemiology. Vol: 5:e62703. DOI: 10.2196/62703.
- Fridman I, Bylund CL, and Elston Lafata J. (2024). Trust of social media content and risk of making misinformed decisions: Survey of people affected by cancer and their caregivers. PEC Innovations. Vol. 5:100332. DOI: 10.1016/j.pecinn.2024.100332.
- Gage-Bouchard EA, LaValley S, Warunek M, Beaupin LK, Mollica M. (2018) Is Cancer Information Exchanged on Social Media Scientifically Accurate? Journal of Cancer Education. Vol. 33(6):1328-1332. DOI: 10.1007/s13187-017-1254-z.
- Gonzalves R, Faisal W, Stebbins T, and Blackberry I. (2025). Tailoring information for adults over 50 living with cancer in the age of social media: A systematic review. Journal of Cancer Policy. Vol 44. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcpo.2025.100589
- Han CJ, Lee YJ, and Demiris G. (2018) Interventions Using Social Media for Cancer Prevention and Management: A Systematic Review. Cancer Nursing. Vol. 41(6):E19-E31. DOI: 10.1097/NCC.0000000000000534
- Lazard AJ, Collins MKR, Hedrick A, Varma T, Love B, Valle CG, Brooks E, Benedict C. (2021) Using Social Media for Peer-to-Peer Cancer Support: Interviews With Young Adults With Cancer. Journal of Medical Internet Research Cancer. Vol. 7(3):e28234. DOI: 10.2196/28234.
- Lazard A.J, Nicolla S, Vereen RN, Pendleton S, Charlot M, Tan HJ, DiFranzo D, Pulido M, Dasgupta N. (2023)
Exposure and Reactions to Cancer Treatment Misinformation and Advice: Survey Study
Journal of Medical Internet Research: Cancer. Vol 9:e43749
DOI: 10.2196/43749 - Loeb S, Langford AT, Bragg MA, Sherman R, and Chan JM. (2024) Cancer misinformation on social media. Cancer Journal for Clinicians. Vol 74:5. pp453-464. DOI: 10.3322/caac.21857
- Sedrak MS, Attai DJ, George K, Katz MS, Markham MJ. (2018) Integrating Social Media in Modern Oncology Practice and Research. American Society of Clinical Oncology Educational Book. Vol. 23; 38:894-902. DOI: 10.1200/EDBK_204453.
- Shrivastava SR, Bobhate PS, Bandre GR. (2025). Exploring the role of social media and online communities in minimizing the cancer-associated stigma. Journal of Cancer Research Therapeutics. Vol 21:1072-4. DOI: 10.4103/jcrt.jcrt_2305_24
- Siew L.E.D, Teo N.R, Ang W.H.D, and Lau Y. (2022). Social media-based interventions for patients with cancer: a meta-analysis and meta-regression of randomised controlled trials. Journal of Cancer Survivorship. Vol 17 (6) 1606-1627 DOI:10.1007/s11764-022-01244-6
- Suarez-Lledo V, and Alvarez-Galvez J. (2021).
Prevalence of Health Misinformation on Social Media: Systematic Review
Journal of Medical Internet Research. Vol. 23(1): e17187
doi: 10.2196/17187 - Wang Y, McKee M, Torbica A, and Stuckler D. (2019). Systematic Literature Review on the Spread of Health-Related Misinformation on Social Media. Social Science and Medicine. Vol 240. DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2019.112552
- Wu, Q.L. (2025) An elaboration likelihood model approach to cancer patients' decision-making: The role of social media use, provider discussion, and misinformation perceptions. Patient Education and Counselling. Vol. 140. DOI: 10.1016/j.pec.2025.109270.
- Zenone M, Snyder J, Bélisle-Pipon JC, Caulfield T, Van Schalkwyk M, Maani N. (2023). Advertising Alternative Cancer Treatments and Approaches on Meta Social Media Platforms: Content Analysis. Journal of Medical Internet Research: Infodemiology. Vol. 3:e43548. DOI: 10.2196/4354