The Evolution of Kidney Stone Information Available to Patients: Interest Trends of Social Media
Abstract
Purpose To identify what information kidney stone patients want and the resources they use to find it, and to
evaluate kidney stone-related smartphone apps based on their actionability, understandability, quality, and reliability.
Methods Google Trends was used to assess searches related to kidney stones and related smartphone applications
(apps) from 2019 to 2021. A questionnaire aimed at ascertaining where patients obtain kidney stone-related information
was posted on popular Facebook groups and one Reddit group. Seven popular kidney stone-related apps were
evaluated for reliability, quality, actionability, and understandability. Univariate statistical analysis, search volume
index, and descriptive statistics were used to assess correlations and impact of variables on outcomes of interest.
Results Between 2019 and 2021, the peak search volume index of kidney stones was in the summer and winter.
Questionnaire participants obtain most information from their doctor (45%), Reddit and Facebook groups (43%),
YouTube (9%), and smartphone apps (4%). 23% reported using a kidney stone app at least once to obtain information.
The average smartphone app overall has poor reliability (2.43, P <0.001) and quality (1.96, P = 0.039) and poor
review of treatment options with side effects (1.36, P = 0.689), and does not encourage shared decision-making (2.57,
P = 0.162). Poor actionability was found in all apps, and good understandability was found in 6 of the 7 apps.
Conclusion While physicians are still the most-used resource for patients, patients are increasingly using online
platforms and smartphone applications. Urologists should consider engaging kidney stone patients through such
platforms to provide reliable educational information.
The Société International d'Urologie (SIU), which owns and publishes the Société International d'Urologie Journal (SIUJ), does not require authors of papers published in the journal to transfer copyright. Instead, we ask authors to grant an exclusive licence that allows us to publish the article in SIUJ (and any derivative or related products or publications) and that allows us to sub-license such rights and exploit all subsidiary rights.
Authors retain the right to use their own articles for their own non-commercial purposes without seeking explicit permission from SIU.
The SIUJ publication licence expressly defines “non-commercial” as “not primarily intended for or directed towards commercial advantage or monetary compensation.” Although no activity is completely disconnected from commercial activity, the following are generally considered to be non-commercial uses:
- Reproduction of a reasonable number (no more than 100) of print copies of the published paper for personal use (e.g., sharing with colleagues, including in grant applications).
- Posting a copy of the published version of the paper on the author’s own or their institution’s website. The article must be accompanied by this statement: ‘This article has been published in the SIUJ: [full citation; link]’.
- Inclusion of the paper in a course pack, with a maximum of 100 copies to be used in the author’s institution. The copies must include the following acknowledgement: ‘This article has been published in the SIUJ: [full citation; link].’
As the distinction between commercial and non-commercial is not always clear, authors are strongly advised to seek permission from SIU for any use that may be considered to have a commercial aspect.
We ask the corresponding author to read the terms of the licence and then to grant this exclusive licence on behalf of all authors by indicating agreement to the following statement:
The corresponding author has the right to grant on behalf of all authors and does grant on behalf of all authors, an exclusive licence on a worldwide basis to the SIU and its licensees to permit this article (if accepted) to be published in the SIUJ and any other SIU products and publications and to exploit all subsidiary rights, as set out in our licence agreement.
Review and Decision
Most submissions will be reviewed by a senior editor within 2 weeks. Many manuscripts will be rejected at this point for a variety of reasons, including subject matter outside the scope of the SIUJ, flawed design, discredited or outdated methodology, poor organization or presentation, failure to conform to ethical requirements, and apparent plagiarism.The remaining manuscripts will be sent for peer review. The SIUJ uses a single-blind process: reviewers know the identity of the authors, but the authors are not told who has reviewed their manuscript, and SIUJ ensures that potentially identifying information is removed from comments sent to them. Reviewers are asked to make their recommendations within 10 days, after which a senior/specialist editor will consider their comments and recommend provisional acceptance dependent on satisfactory revision, acceptance without revision, or rejection. Authors should receive a final decision within 4 to 6 weeks of submission.
