How to use social media to amplify your professional impact in respiratory medicine

Abstract

Social media has become an integral component of modern medical practice, with most healthcare professionals engaging with it in some capacity. Its use has been associated with enhanced knowledge dissemination, professional networking, and increased visibility of research and clinical expertise. For respiratory healthcare professionals, social media offers particular value in navigating rapidly evolving evidence, technological innovation, establishing international collaborations and ongoing public health challenges.

This article summarises current evidence and provides practical guidance on how to use social media to amplify professional impact in respiratory medicine, both in a professional context and in clinical practice with patients. We discuss key definitions, opportunities and limitations, with a focus on responsible and effective use to support collaboration, education and patient engagement.

Shareable abstract

Social media offers respiratory health professionals a powerful platform for research dissemination, professional networking, and patient engagement, but its effective use requires strategic alignment of platform, audience, and communicative objective. https://bit.ly/45hRIuE

Introduction

Social media has become an integral component of modern medical practice. In a European survey among healthcare professionals, >80% reported using some form of social media, either both for personal and professional purposes (64%) or for professional use only (18.5%) [1]. For respiratory healthcare specialists managing evolving diseases, rapidly advancing technological possibilities and ongoing public health challenges, social media platforms offer valuable opportunities to remain up to date, to share clinical insights and to compare their clinical work with practices around the world.

Beyond information exchange, social media can amplify professional impact by increasing the reach of research, enhancing academic visibility, and fostering (inter)national connections and collaborations. Healthcare professionals can rapidly share their research findings, engage in scientific discussions and develop their professional identity, which helps influence both peers, patients and the general public. Moreover, posting high-quality professional knowledge content on social media has been associated with improved patient adherence and treatment effectiveness [2].

Not only individual specialists, but also major respiratory societies like the European Respiratory Society (ERS), American Thoracic Society and national societies, actively leverage social media platforms through targeted strategies, such as live conference coverage, informative podcasts and guideline highlights series.

This article aims to summarise:

• key definitions and principles underpinning social media use in respiratory medicine

• its professional application for respiratory healthcare professionals

• its role in patient engagement and education, highlighting both opportunities and challenges in maximising its impact

General principles of social media use in respiratory medicine

What do we mean by “social media”?

The term “social media” is often used so broadly that it has become almost synonymous with any form of digital communication, a confusion with practical implications for clinicians and researchers aiming to use these tools effectively. Before considering how social media can amplify professional impact in respiratory medicine, it is essential to clarify what the term encompasses – and what it does not.

The most widely adopted academic definition, proposed by Kaplan and Haenlein [3], describes social media as “a group of Internet-based applications that build on the ideological and technological foundations of Web 2.0, and which allow the creation and exchange of user-generated content”. Two elements are central. First, Web 2.0, introduced by O’Reilly [4], reflects the shift from a static, read-only internet to a participatory model in which users both consume and generate content. Second, user-generated content distinguishes social media from platforms such as journal websites or institutional portals, where content is curated and controlled rather than community-driven.

This distinction has practical relevance. Departmental websites, ERS educational modules and remote monitoring platforms are important digital health tools, but they are not social media in this sense, as they are editorially governed rather than open to user contribution. The same applies to mailing lists, which distribute information unidirectionally. Recognising these boundaries is essential, as governance, communication risks and engagement strategies differ substantially across these tools [5].

For the purposes of this article, social media refers to platforms accessible to broad audiences, primarily driven by user-generated content, and enabling real-time interaction through comments, shares, reactions and messaging.

Knowing your platforms: communication formats, audiences, and strategic alignment

Social media platforms differ substantially in both their structural architecture and communication affordances, and a common mistake among healthcare professionals is engaging without a clearly defined communicative purpose. Effective use requires aligning platform choice with audience, objectives and available content formats.

Platforms can be broadly divided into professional/academic and general-audience categories. In the professional domain, LinkedIn, X (formerly Twitter) and ResearchGate are central to scientific communication. LinkedIn supports structured professional networking through long-form text posts, infographics, portable document format carousels, short videos and expert articles aimed at collegial audiences. X enables rapid dissemination of research, real-time conference engagement, and discussion of emerging evidence through short text posts, threads, images, short videos and live audio discussions (X Spaces). Notably, physicians have been shown to generate a disproportionate share of high-quality scientific content on X during major congresses such as the American Society of Clinical Oncology Annual Meeting [6]. However, usage patterns on X have drastically shifted over time: a large fraction of health professionals left the platform due to minimal restrictions on misinformative and abusive content [7], and it must nowadays be considered a hybrid (professional but also general-audience) media. ResearchGate occupies a more specialised role as a repository for publications, supporting citation tracking and academic visibility through academic dissemination of research articles, abstracts, scientific figures and scholarly exchanges, with more limited interactivity [7].

General-audience platforms operate differently and rely more heavily on visual storytelling, entertainment and community interaction. YouTube is widely used by patients seeking explanations of diagnoses, inhaler techniques or rehabilitation guidance, and centres on long-form videos, tutorials, webinars and video podcasts [8]. Instagram and TikTok, centred on short-form visual content – photographs, stories, Reels, infographics, and short vertical videos – are effective for health promotion, particularly among younger populations; TikTok, in particular, relies on rapid editing, captions and viral formats. Facebook remains a major source of health information, especially for older users, and combines text posts, images, community groups, videos, livestreams and link sharing to offer broad and community-oriented interaction; it hosts active peer-support communities for chronic respiratory diseases such as COPD, pulmonary fibrosis and severe asthma [9]. Podcast platforms, such as Spotify, have shown some potential in health promotion [10].

Platform selection should therefore align three variables:

• communicative goal

• target audience

• content format

Misalignment between these elements is a frequent cause of ineffective engagement.

Who are you talking to? Defining your target audience

Defining the target audience is fundamental, as it determines tone, vocabulary, level of technical detail and ethical framing. In respiratory medicine, three main audiences can be identified.

• Content directed at peers – such as scientific commentary, methodological discussion or congress updates – can assume shared expertise and aims to foster professional dialogue or increase research visibility [11]. This content is well suited to platforms like LinkedIn and X.

• Communication targeting the general public requires accessibility without loss of scientific accuracy. Topics such as air pollution, smoking cessation or post-viral respiratory sequelae have broad relevance but demand careful framing to avoid oversimplification or misinterpretation [11].

• Patient-facing communication carries the greatest responsibility. Patients increasingly use social media to complement or, at times, substitute formal healthcare access [12], often with variable health literacy and emotional vulnerability. Healthcare professionals are consistently perceived as highly trusted sources of online health information [13], creating both an opportunity and an obligation to communicate responsibly.

A cross-cutting risk is “context collapse” [14], whereby content intended for one audience reaches another. Social media posts can be shared or algorithmically distributed beyond their original context, leading to unintended interpretations. For example, a technical discussion of diagnostic uncertainty may be misinterpreted by patients as alarming or a nuanced statement about treatment risks may be amplified by oppositional groups. Awareness of this phenomenon should guide decisions on platform, privacy and content detail. The key question is not only whether content is accurate but how it may be interpreted by unintended audiences.

Verified information versus misinformation: is there a role for health professionals?

As previously exposed, social media are powerful tools to rapidly and massively share information. In this context, healthcare professionals may face various challenges, such as misinformation, since the general public (including patients with known diagnoses) has been gradually using social media to seek and share health-related information, and track their health status or activity, but also exchange social support in online communities, the former being the most common [15]. Broadly, misinformation refers to false information given either by mistake or deliberately and, for the purpose of this review, relates to the concept of “infodemic” first developed by Rothkopf [16] during the 2002–2004 SARS-CoV-1 outbreak. The World Health Organization defines an infodemic as “too much information including false or misleading information in digital and physical environments during a disease outbreak”, eventually causing confusion and risk-taking behaviours that can harm health and mistrust in health authorities, which undermines the public health response [17]. Recent specific examples for respiratory health regarding social media include: the COVID-19 pandemic, where misinformation contributed to the use of unproven treatments, nonadherence to mitigation measures and high levels of vaccine hesitancy [18]; and electronic nicotine delivery systems (e.g. electronic cigarettes), for which pro-vaping exaggeration tweets misinterpreted results from scientific studies, or distortion circulated that nicotine is not addictive, never harmful or has unproven health benefits [19]. Of note, infodemic management targets appropriate health practices through promoting understanding of risk and health expert advice in particular [17]. Thus, healthcare professionals may represent a trusted voice, with increased trust in line with adequate listening, offering as much as information as expected from patients or advice on what to do if problems or symptoms continued/get worse [20]. More specifically, using social media (especially discussion forums, which could be categorised in social networking sites such as Facebook, and content communities, blogs and online discussion forums) among healthcare professionals has been shown to facilitate chronic disease self-management for patients [21] while, for instance, a breast cancer education and support group on X (comprising patients but also surgeons, oncologists or nurses) allowed patients improve their global knowledge or specific knowledge on survivorship and treatment options [22]. To mitigate the risk of misinformation, healthcare professionals may undertake adequate content verification practices (e.g. source or expert verification) and apply institutional/organisational roles in digital communication governance (e.g. who may be allowed to communicate on a specific topic within a given institution).

What risks beyond misinformation?

Social media users may be confronted to additional threats including “digital permanence”, which refers to the notion that any information shared online (regardless of its format) will remain indefinitely available in the digital space [23]. For respiratory healthcare professionals who would like to engage/post on social media, this concept may have two major implications:

• ensuring that any content posted on a personal account is carefully reviewed for accuracy and to avoid causing offense

• recognising that content posted on a given day may have both positive and negative consequences that extend far beyond the original moment [24]

This aligns with two other potential risks. First, unlike the pre-publication peer-review process in academic publishing, user-generated content on social media is reviewed post-publication reviewed through engagement, critique and dissemination, thereby increasing the responsibility of individuals posting content, even though platforms are theoretically expected to control/moderate contributions [25]. Next, even when clinical data are anonymised before publication, there still can remain a risk of identification and patient confidentiality might be threatened, especially with images or unusual cases. In this situation, caution should be taken when sharing clinical data online and consent should be sought when appropriate, as healthcare professionals may sometimes share more information than patient or families may expect [26]. As stated earlier, context collapse (which broadly refers to how people, information and norms from different settings all converge into one context [27]) may come into play. Practically, as respiratory professionals, it may imply that content initially intended for colleagues or peers could also reach patients or the general public, thereby influencing how the key message is interpreted or perceived by these unintended audiences. To lessen the aforementioned risks, practical safeguards may be required including “think-again-before-posting” standards, proper separation of professional and personal identity, and cautious use of clinical content in relation to respiratory health.

How to use social media in professional practice

For healthcare professionals, especially early-career researchers, social media is a tool for shaping professional identity before reputation becomes fixed. In this critical window, they can construct how the world knows their name, positioning themselves not just for past accomplishments but for who they want to become. This is not about accumulating followers; it is about strategic visibility and authentic networks that drive career advancement. We present a practical three-phase framework with steps adapted from previous research on social media use in professional contexts [28–31], described in figure 1.

FIGURE 1.

Step-by-step guide to building your professional social media presence.

Phase 1: establishing strategic foundations

This phase begins with the question, what do I want people to associate with my name? For early-career researchers, whose online identity is still forming, this is an opportunity to actively shape a presence that reflects not just what they have done but where they are headed [29]. A critical first step is determining whether to maintain a private or public profile, as this choice shapes accessibility and professional impact. Social media platforms offer different privacy configurations. Some platforms (e.g. Instagram and TikTok) allow profiles to be either private (visible only to approved followers) or public (visible to all users). Others, such as Facebook, offer granular privacy controls allowing users to share different content with specific audiences, selected groups or only with themselves. The appropriate choice depends on your professional context and audience [32]. For research-focused professionals seeking to build academic visibility, expand collaboration networks or disseminate research findings, a public profile may allow broader accessibility to expertise and research contributions [32]. However, early-career researchers should consider whether a public research profile aligns with professional ethics and patient expectations [33]. Yet, some early-career researchers maintain separate professional (public) and personal (private) accounts, or use pseudonyms or non-identifiable avatars when sharing their work online, allowing them to build an academic presence separate from their clinical practice [33].

From this starting point, two further questions follow naturally. The first concerns aim: what do I hope to achieve? Whether the goal is to expand a professional network, attract collaborators, disseminate research findings and/or reach specific audience (namely, patients, clinicians or policymakers), setting a goal will prevent scattered effort and allow a meaningful evaluation of return on time investment [31]. The second concerns audience: for whom is this profile intended? Often, before a potential mentor, collaborator, patient or recruiter meets us in person, our online profile is the first impression they form [32]. Understanding who that person is allows us to tailor our communication style, platform choice and content accordingly, making the profile meaningful and relevant to those we want to reach [29, 31].

Phase 2: selection and strategic execution

The next phase requires thoughtful platform selection and consistent execution. Different social media platforms have distinct possibilities, audience demographics and engagement patterns. Research shows that platform choice directly impacts outcomes:

• LinkedIn shows a positive correlation with job recruitment compared to X and Facebook [32].

• Visual Platforms (e.g. TikTok, Instagram and YouTube) demonstrated higher engagement rates (measured through likes, comments and reactions), specifically TikTok when compared to Instagram and YouTube [15, 34].

• X remains particularly valuable for academic networking, real-time discussion of research and participating in scholarly conversations within discipline [35, 36].

Despite the reported impact of research using multiplatform presence [37, 38], the pressure associated with posting frequency and content quality further compounds the challenge for early-career professionals who are often managing competing demands [39]. Thus, one should prioritise depth on one or two platforms over shallow presence on more [29]. Nevertheless, studies show that posting frequency and content quality is associated with greater research impact in social media [32, 36]. Therefore, optimising the time spent on content creation is crucial. Some strategies emerge from recent research.

• Leverage graphical abstracts: research demonstrates that articles featuring graphical abstracts generate higher visibility [36]. Additionally, content combining images with text or links generates more interactions than text-only posts [32, 38]. Since many journals request authors to create both written highlights and graphical abstracts as standard practice, early-career researchers can efficiently leverage this work across their social media channels without duplicating effort.

• Integrate personal narrative: “behind-the-scenes” posts combined with graphical abstracts yield more full-text downloads and deeper engagement [15, 38, 40], while adding authenticity that resonates with audiences.

• Use artificial intelligence (AI) tools thoughtfully: emerging AI tools can be a valuable resource for generating ideas, seeking clarification and initiating engagement [15]. However, content produced solely by AI has been perceived as overly generic, impersonal, lower quality or lacking authenticity, and prone to “semantic garbage” [15]. Thus, users should adapt AI-generated materials to their own voice, context and audience. Transparency may also be warranted, with some studies recommending disclosure when content is directly copied from generative AI tools [15]. Users should also incorporate stylist adaptations (not only to their personal style but also to the social media platforms'). Some examples can be found on table 1 and table 2.

TABLE 1.

Example of the use of artificial intelligence (AI) for content creation for an early-career profile

AI prompt	AI-generated result¶
Please consider the following abstract# “Background: Pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) is essential for people with chronic respiratory diseases (CRDs), yet its impact on cough-related quality of life (CR-QoL) remains unexplored. We assessed the effects of PR on CR-QoL, described the characteristics of responders and nonresponders to PR, and explored determinants of responsiveness in this health domain in individuals with CRDs. Methods: A retrospective study was conducted. We assessed CR-QoL using the Leicester Cough Questionnaire (LCQ) and the impact of the disease with the COPD Assessment Test (CAT), before and after PR. Cut-offs of <17.05 in LCQ total score and ≥10 in CAT were used to detect low CR-QoL and medium impact of the disease. Responders were defined as achieving a minimal clinically important difference (MCID) of ≥1.3 on the LCQ total score. Pre- versus post-PR analysis involved the t-test, Wilcoxon test or McNemar test and comparisons between groups included the independent t-test, Mann–Whitney U-test or Fisher's exact test. Logistic regression was employed to investigate factors influencing MCID achievement. Results: 135 participants with CRDs (39% females; age 68±10 years; 61% COPD; forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) % pred 62.6±23.0%) were included. After PR, significant improvements were observed in all LCQ domains and CAT. 31% of participants were identified as responders in the LCQ (36% females; age 66±10 years; 62% COPD; FEV1% pred 60.0±22.3%), showcasing significant differences in the LCQ and CAT compared to nonresponders. People with low CR-QoL and medium/high impact of the disease at baseline were 11 and 4 times more likely to respond to PR in CR-QoL, respectively. PR enhances CR-QoL. Identification of CR-QoL and disease impact traits at baseline offers insights to optimise this outcome responsiveness to PR.” Create four publications for each of the following social media platforms: Facebook, Instagram, X/Twitter and LinkedIn (one publication for each platform). Please consider each platform specificities. Each post should have the aim and the main findings of the study. Keep it engaging while professional.	Facebook+	Pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) is already known to improve outcomes in chronic respiratory diseases—but what about its effect on cough-related quality of life? Our latest study explored exactly that. Aim: To evaluate how PR impacts cough-related quality of life (CR-QoL), and to identify which patients benefit the most. Key findings: PR significantly improved cough-related quality of life across all domains 31% of participants achieved meaningful improvement Patients with worse baseline symptoms were up to 11x more likely to benefit Greater disease impact also increased responsiveness Takeaway: PR doesn't just help breathing—it meaningfully improves how patients live with their condition. Identifying those most likely to benefit can help personalize care. #PulmonaryRehabilitation #RespiratoryHealth #COPD #HealthcareResearch
	Instagram§	Can pulmonary rehab improve more than just breathing? Yes—it can improve quality of life too. Our study looked at: How pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) affects cough-related quality of life in people with chronic respiratory diseases. What we found: ✔ Significant improvements after PR ✔ 1 in 3 patients had clinically meaningful gains ✔ Those with worse symptoms at baseline improved the most ✔ Higher disease burden=higher chance of benefiting Bottom line: PR is a powerful tool—not just for lungs, but for daily life. #PulmonaryRehab #ChronicIllness #COPD #HealthResearch #QualityOfLife
	LinkedIn	Pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) is a cornerstone intervention in chronic respiratory diseases—but its impact on cough-related quality of life (CR-QoL) has been largely overlooked. Study aim: To assess the effects of PR on CR-QoL and identify characteristics and determinants of patient responsiveness. Key findings: PR significantly improved CR-QoL across all domains 31% of participants achieved clinically meaningful improvement Patients with poorer baseline CR-QoL were 11x more likely to respond Greater disease impact increased likelihood of improvement Implications: These findings reinforce the value of PR beyond traditional clinical outcomes and highlight the importance of baseline patient profiling to optimize intervention effectiveness. #Healthcare #PulmonaryRehabilitation #COPD #ClinicalResearch #PatientOutcomes
	X	Does pulmonary rehabilitation improve cough-related quality of life? Our study says YES. Key findings: Significant improvements post-PR 31% achieved meaningful gains Worse baseline QoL → up to 11x more likely to benefit Higher disease impact=better response PR can transform daily living—not just symptoms. #COPD #PulmonaryRehab #RespiratoryResearch

Third-party social media management tools (e.g. Buffer, Hootsuite, Later and Sprout Social) support cross-platform dissemination by enabling advance scheduling, centralised multiaccount management and unified engagement analytics, reducing the time burden associated with maintaining a multiplatform presence. Users should review the privacy policies of these services, particularly when content relates to institutional communications. ^#: this abstract is from a real paper (reproduced with permission from [41]). ^¶: using Chat GPT 5.2. ⁺: leveraging automatic link previews: LinkedIn, Facebook and X automatically generate preview cards when a link to a published paper is shared in a post. These preview cards typically display metadata extracted from the journal's webpage, most commonly the journal's logo or thumbnail cover image. However, researchers can optimise this feature by ensuring the paper includes a graphical abstract in its metadata. Test the link preview before posting by using the platform's link preview tool (available in most social media post composers) to confirm that the most visually compelling version of your paper's metadata appears. ^§: platform-specific adaptation: Instagram requires visual content (images, carousels or videos). For example, in this case, the research summary could be adapted for Instagram video as follows: 1) use the abstract with AI assistance to generate a concise 60-s voiceover script that highlights key findings; 2) have the researcher record the voiceover personally to maintain authenticity and credibility, or alternatively, produce the content as a text-based short video with key findings appearing as overlaid text while field images or research process visuals play in the background; 3) retain the graphical abstract as a cover frame or key visual anchor. The choice between voiceover and visual text depends on individual preferences, available resources (time, equipment), and audience expectations within the discipline. Visual adaptations should avoid generic AI-generated imagery; if such imagery is used, it must be clearly disclosed. Original photographs, field documentation, or images from the research process enhance authenticity and professional credibility.

TABLE 2.

Example of revision from the use of artificial intelligence for content creation for an early-career profile

Reviewed version
Facebook	New article We already know that pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) is already known to improve outcomes in chronic respiratory diseases, but what about its effect on cough-related quality of life? Our latest study explored exactly that. PR significantly improved cough-related quality of life across all domains 31% of participants achieved meaningful improvement People with worse baseline symptoms were up to 11x more likely to benefit Greater disease impact also increased responsiveness PR improves how people with chronic respiratory disease live with their condition. Identifying those most likely to benefit can help personalise care. https://publications.ersnet.org/content/erjor/11/2/00308-2024
Instagram	Can pulmonary rehab (PR) improve cough-related quality of life (CR-QoL)? How pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) affects CR-QoL in people with chronic respiratory diseases? What we found: ✔ Significant improvements after PR ✔ 1 in 3 participants had clinically meaningful gains ✔ Those with worse symptoms at baseline improved the most ✔ Higher disease burden=higher chance of benefiting Bottom line: PR is a powerful tool—not just for lungs, but for daily life.
LinkedIn	After many months collecting data, some weeks analysing it and some hours of despair, we have now some results to share. We already knew that pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) is a cornerstone intervention in chronic respiratory diseases. However, its impact on cough-related quality of life (CR-QoL) has been largely overlooked. Thus, we aimed to assess the effects of PR on CR-QoL and identify characteristics and determinants of patient responsiveness. We found that: PR significantly improved CR-QoL across all domains 31% of participants achieved clinically meaningful improvement People with poorer baseline CR-QoL were 11 times more likely to respond Greater disease impact increased likelihood of improvement These findings reinforce the value of PR beyond traditional clinical outcomes and highlight the importance of baseline individual profiling to optimise intervention effectiveness. I would also like to express my gratitude to all the people with chronic respiratory diseases who agreed to help us with our research. https://publications.ersnet.org/content/erjor/11/2/00308-2024 #Healthcare #PulmonaryRehabilitation #COPD #ClinicalResearch #PatientOutcomes
X	Does pulmonary rehabilitation improve cough-related quality of life? PR demonstrated significant improvements post. People with worse baseline QoL were up to 11x more likely to benefit. https://publications.ersnet.org/content/erjor/11/2/00308-2024

Large language models (LLMs) can support multiple stages of the social media workflow, including drafting platform-adapted content from scientific abstracts, adjusting tone and health literacy level for different audiences, generating engagement prompts and supporting content calendar planning. However, LLM-generated content has been associated with reduced authenticity and generic phrasing; outputs should therefore be substantially revised to reflect the author's own voice, clinical expertise and institutional context. Disclosure of LLM use is recommended where content is directly derived from generative AI. Human oversight remains essential, particularly for clinically sensitive topics where accuracy and professional accountability cannot be delegated.

Ethical and privacy considerations remain critical, particularly in health content creation. The temptation to share clinical material, including images or examination results (especially before and after an intervention or in an unusual case), can arise but doing so without explicit consent is not permissible. Under the General Data Protection Regulation (European Union (EU) Regulation 2016/679), all individuals have the right to protect their personal data. It is often not enough to just avoid mentioning a person's name, as other details may allow for that person to be identified via:

• Time association (e.g. posting a clinical/patient story on the same day that you are seeing them in clinic)

• Geographical association (e.g. discussing elements of a rare disease or presentation that characterise a small number of people in your geographical area of practice)

• Medical record association (e.g. sharing rare laboratory or genetic test results that may allow other colleagues to identify the person to whom you are referring)

In practice, this means never sharing identifiable patient information online, always obtaining explicit written consent before posting any clinical content and erring on the side of caution when uncertain.

Phase 3: growth and sustainability

Phase 3 recognises that social media can serve as a platform for professional development beyond content creation. Thus, it is important to revisit our aims and to establish specific metrics to determine growth and evaluate sustainability. For example, for those seeking to expand a professional network, metrics might emphasise quality of engagement (e.g. comment replies and view duration) over follower counts.

Institutional amplification (where an organisation or institution shares a member's work with its own audience) or collaborating with strategic individuals in the field can increase the reach and impact of one's work [42] and their possibility of being recruited through social media [32]. For instance, Assembly 1 of the ERS recently invited their members to submit details of recent investigations to their communications team for dissemination through the assembly's social media channels (Members’ Desk initiative). This collaboration creates a win–win outcome:

• the members’ research team reaches a wider and specific audience

• the members gain recognition from an established institution

• the Assembly benefits from showcasing active, relevant work by its members

Such arrangements also strengthen the sense of belonging within professional communities, which may further enhance member involvement in other activities. Similar collaborations can also be pursued directly between members. Taken together, these initiatives can further enhance international collaboration and the dissemination of research in a larger scale [37].

Challenges to social media use

Social media has become an essential dimension of contemporary academic life [29, 32, 35]. However, framed sustainability is essential. Table 3 summarises common challenges to professional social media use and practical strategies to address them [29, 35].

TABLE 3.

Challenges and potential solutions to social media use among the scientific community

Challenge	Potential solution
Perceived lack of time	Establish collaboration with colleagues and/or institutions to share content creation responsibilities Use AI tools to support idea generation and drafting Plan content in advance (e.g. batch writing or recording, scheduling posts)
Concerns about sharing personal experiences (risk of judgement)	Share only content that aligns with professional boundaries and would be appropriate sharing with a coworker Maintain a focus on educational or research-related content
Dealing with polarised or controversial topics	Share evidence-based, neutral and balanced information Establish clear guidelines for engaging with comments and discussions Develop a protocol for managing conflict, including when to disengage Prioritise platforms where you can control comments and replies Use disclaimers
Maintaining consistency over time	Set a realistic posting frequency Use scheduling tools Integrate social media into existing workflows (e.g. after publications)

AI: artificial intelligence.

Researchers can benefit from integrating social media into their career strategies in an ethical and sustainable manner. However, the long-term effects of social media use on research impact remain uncertain [38].

Using social media in practice for patients

From 2015 to 2025, the proportion of individuals living in EU-27 countries who have used the Internet to seek health-related information has risen from 45% to >60% [43]. Direct communication from qualified medical professionals and subject matter experts is essential to fill online information “voids” where misinformation can spread. Moreover, reaching patients and patient support organisations directly via social media is a fantastic opportunity to amplify your own professional impact, and shape priorities in respiratory medicine and research, and could even be a tool for patient and public involvement and engagement [44].

Using social media for patients responsibly

Engaging with patients on social media has both advantages and disadvantages (table 4) that should be carefully considered. Creating online content is often easy but its impact can be unpredictable. Asking questions such as “Who will see this information?”, “Is it going to help or confuse patients?” and “Is this in my best interest?” should be considered prior to posting. It is not uncommon for employers or supervisors to encourage sharing of research findings or to promote certain services on social media; however, if this is done through personal channels, the author can often bear the full responsibility for any miscommunication, especially if interpreted as having led to harm. Due to medicolegal implications, you must maintain patient confidentiality and consider the reputational impact for organisations that you are affiliated with. Formal policies may be in place for disclosing conflicts of interest related to social media use. For particularly controversial topics (e.g. stem cell research, assisted dying an genetic diseases) you may wish to consider seeking professional advice before engaging with patients online.

TABLE 4.

Advantages and disadvantages of using social media to engage with patients

Advantages

Disadvantages

Increase your personal visibility and professional impact Influence health behaviours Increase the visibility of your clinical work and research Build links with patient support organisations and charities Find potential investors and funders for your projects Link with professionals in other fields to develop multidisciplinary collaborations and find technical expertise Learn about patient priorities for respiratory medicine and research Anticipate frequently asked questions for your real-life consultations Be seen as approachable and genuine which can lead to better patient interactions Organise community events Attract future clinicians and researchers to the Respiratory field Build a personal brand and track record which can help you transition into new roles

Lack of nuance for individual patient situations Increasing your visibility can attract negative behaviours online and offline (e.g. from other social media users, colleagues, employers) Patients may recognise you in real life and comment about your social media presence Some patients may contact you directly for medical advice Conflicts of interest of a professional or personal nature may emerge You may be breaching communication or governance policies of your employer Breaching the privacy and confidentiality of patients and relatives Inadvertently amplifying false information that can negatively affect individuals in real-life Possible scrutiny by professional regulators or litigation Possible increased cost of professional indemnity insurance

Albeit concerning, the risks to your professional reputation and standing are often counterbalanced by very strong opportunities, especially when social media content is formulated in a responsible manner, using disclaimers, and seeking support and advice from neutral parties where appropriate. In addition to setting personal boundaries (e.g. refusing requests for medical advice via private messages), it may be helpful to choose social media platforms or features where you can maintain a level of control over how posts and comments are amplified and shared (e.g. YouTube comments cannot be widely shared, closed Facebook groups to filter who sees your content and X community notes to flag inappropriate/misleading posts).

Best practices for engaging with patients on social media

There is not one single best way to use social media for patient engagement. Topics that can be addressed range from educational and practical (e.g. reducing risk factors for respiratory disease, using home oxygen, inhaler technique, breathlessness management and treatment options) to offering professional perspectives on current events (e.g. managing the effects of wildfires on chronic respiratory disease) and human insights (e.g. explaining your work as a respiratory physician or researcher, and sharing patient stories and views – with consent). Communicating on social media has broad impact that goes beyond traditional academic metrics (e.g. scientific publications). As patients are the primary beneficiaries of medical services and research, you may help influence primary prevention and better management of respiratory conditions, raise awareness of research studies and increase recruitment, expand your professional network, and gain the attention of patient organisations and charities that can provide funding and influence policy change. The impact extends beyond the online space, as social media can be used to successfully organise and manage community events and meetings (e.g. patient support groups and charity sports competitions). Existing evidence on the relationship between social media use and patient outcomes is largely based on observational studies, which primarily supports associations rather than causal effects, with limited experimental or longitudinal evidence available.

The type of content (i.e. long-form video, Reels, infographics, short posts, live streaming, etc.) can be tailored based on the patient audience you want to reach, considering factors such as age, tech literacy and the most commonly used platforms in your country. You can choose to remain fully neutral or add a human touch to your content, such as reaction videos or educational entertainment (edutainment).

In a busy internet space, it may take a few years to build a large audience when targeting the general public; however, social media algorithms will match and deliver your content to relevant patients and organisations even when you have a small number of followers. Metrics such as view duration, the number of shares and the quality of the comments are often more meaningful than follower counts, views and likes. Rather than aiming to “go viral” and following current trends, it is often better as a professional to focus on highly specific and “evergreen” content that provides reliable high-quality information that is unlikely to change in the near future, as this will often be ranked higher by search engines and algorithms. Increasing engagement and recognition over time can be facilitated by using a specific visual identity (personal branding), building online patient communities, analysing metrics provided by social media platforms, and actively engaging with comments to maintain momentum and identify frequently asked questions as ideas for future content.

Healthcare professionals should be aware that each platform's content promotion algorithm operates according to distinct proprietary logics, and identical content may achieve substantially different reach depending on where it is published. Documented patterns include: X favouring recency and early engagement velocity; Instagram and TikTok prioritising watch time, Reels completion rate, and saves/shares; TikTok particularly effective at reaching non-follower audiences; LinkedIn rewarding dwell time and substantive comments while limiting the reach of posts containing external links; YouTube weighting click-through rate and viewer retention; and Facebook progressively deprioritising organic page reach in favour of Group and personal profile content.

These differences have direct implications for cross-platform strategies. Rather than reposting identical content, professionals should adapt format and framing to each platform's algorithmic logic – for instance, structuring the same research finding as a discussion prompt on LinkedIn, a captioned Reel on Instagram, a thread on X and an explainer video on YouTube – to achieve comparable visibility across platforms.

Public opinions of health professionals carry a significant weight and can influence health behaviours. Regardless of how you choose to use social media for patients, you should prioritise evidence-based messages, avoid ambiguity, and use an appropriate tone and pace of delivery that is suitable for individuals who may not have medical or scientific training (but avoid being patronising). Maintaining professionalism by setting appropriate boundaries, protecting patient confidentiality, managing conflicts of interest and responding to hateful comments or misinformation in a graceful tone that diffuses tension and avoids amplifying controversy can help you build trust and rapport with patients on a large scale, and contribute to a meaningful clinical and research career.

Conclusions

Social media has become an important component of modern respiratory medicine, providing valuable opportunities for research dissemination, professional networking, academic visibility, international collaboration and patient engagement. Used responsibly, it allows respiratory health professionals to extend the reach of their clinical, educational and research activities beyond traditional settings, connecting with colleagues, patients, policymakers and the wider public. To maximise its benefits, social media engagement should be guided by clear goals, an understanding of the target audience, careful platform selection, and adherence to ethical and professional standards.

Although challenges such as misinformation, loss of context, digital permanence, and the demands on time and resources remain, these can be addressed through strategic planning, institutional support and the appropriate use of emerging technologies, including AI. As digital communication continues to evolve, respiratory professionals who adopt an evidence-based, ethical and sustainable approach to social media will be well positioned to influence practice, improve patient education and advocacy, and contribute to the ongoing advancement of respiratory health.

Key points

• Social media offers respiratory health professionals an opportunity for research dissemination, professional networking and patient engagement, but its effective use requires strategic alignment of platform, audience and communicative objective.

• Misinformation, context collapse and digital permanence represent substantive risks that can be mitigated through evidence-based communication, ethical awareness and judicious content planning.

• Artificial intelligence tools can support social media content creation but should be used transparently, and adapted to the author's professional voice and platform context.

• Engaging patients via social media carries particular responsibility, requiring strict adherence to confidentiality, professional boundaries and health literacy-appropriate communication.