What's the value of an online health community?

How do you assess the value of an online community? I've been thinking about the number of online communities for health related topics and I'm trying to figure out a way to evaluate and assign a value for joining a community. Is this possible? There seems to be millions of health communities. Two people connect in an online forum - boom! - it's a community!

Just for a simple example - go google "cancer communities." The results? 18,100,000 hits!

Even within the top 10 results, where should I start? How do I know which communities to join, which to skim, and which to skip? What if I miss something?

I started thinking the value of communities after reading Susannah Fox's post on "Patient Communities.... at Walgreens?" Even though the community example was hypothetical, it's not that far off. Online communities will continue to increase and grow. Pharma companies, hospitals, patients, health insurance companies, and non-profit organizations are all looking to add to the online health community landscape. At what point do we have enough communities? Does the value of the community diminish as the sheer number of communities increases? Will online communities ever mimic business behaviors with an equivalent of mergers and acquisitions?

As health activists, it's important to find the best communities to share with others. But what happens when there's too many? Are there "silos" of communities out there that have pockets of knowledge that might be useful in other communities? How do we begin to harness the collective knowledge of these potentially disparate communities? What if one community holds the answers to another community's questions? Perhaps these questions are too philosophical - but when someone's health is at stake?

In the technology world, when data elements become trapped or "siloed", software programs can be developed that find and link pieces of data together to build more valuable solutions. But there's no analogy yet in the online community world. Until then, uncovering and linking communities is up to the individual person, with each person's experience defining the depth and breadth of the community.

How do you pick the best ones? Is there some metric that can be used to evaluate a community's content or members? How do you value an online community? What's the maximum number of communities that a person can join and still find value? As health activists, what's our role in finding and valuing these communities? Let's start the discussion!

Tags: communities, community, patient communities

Comment by Dianne Rees on June 28, 2010 at 2:46pm: Think there's a mix of content value, social value, and collaboration value and all these values contribute to the ultimate value of an online community.

For content, I look for a community where there's a mix of participants with different backgrounds to share a range of content. For example, the community ideally includes health care professionals, domain experts (very aware of a subject but not necessarily docs or nurses), people who can offer input based on their own experiences with health problems,and people who just want to learn. There should be a sense of sense of shared learning. For example, we help each other out in evaluating the credibility of shared links vs just propagating dodgy information.

Social value: This one's very personal, so I doubt you can really establish a metric for it. The mix of people in the community is most important for determining social value and whether discussions are positive, nurturing, and open-minded.

Collaboration value: Although social value's personal, collaboration value can be complemented by tools. What does the community offer to foster discussion and collaboration? Discussion forums? Collaboration spaces? Webinars? How easy is it to share different types of information using the tools provided? How does the site promote grass root efforts beyond just discussions?

But even with tools the human element is still an important factor, how actively does the community use the tools? How do facilitators of the site help participants connect with each other?

As a health activist, my goal lately is to try to create resources that can help people wade through the glut of health information more readily, so being part of a community like WEGO is a part of that goal.

Comment by CarissaO on June 28, 2010 at 5:51pm: Timely topic, Alicia, as it's one I've been mulling lately as well. Dianne did a nice job above of piecing out the elements of how you might rate a given community to see if it's worth your investment in time, content, social capital, etc. I'm looking at this from 50,000 feet...

To be blunt, I'd rather see fewer health communities...fewer, more targeted, more resource-rich, more funded, more engaging communities that really have the power to meet their missions. There are so very many "health communities" today, but how many are really experiencing a sustainable level of engagement? How many have a real community behind them? How many have dedicated community managers driving their missions? How many are routinely known or easily found by their target audiences? How many are genuinely helping people with dialogues around health issues and creating positive change? I'd venture to say few.

These characteristics, in my opinion, are critical elements of success. In some cases, I think organizations or individuals are too quick to create something new, when the best course of action may be to make something that exists stronger. Collaborations and strategic partnerships can pool resources and join missions to achieve more. Strong or passionate activists lending their energy toward an established community could help both the community and the activist to reach more of their respective audiences. And brands partnering with nonprofits and independent health communities can create an opportunity for authentic dialogue with their caregiver and patient audiences in a way they'd be challenged to do on their own.

In short, let's work together more. Finding smart opportunities for collaboration may just be the right fit for the future of health communities.

Comment by Ellen S on June 29, 2010 at 9:44am: Dianne did a great job with her breakdown. I'm not sure I have anything to add, other than simply to say that there is definitely a limit to how many communities one person can be a member of and still contribute and participate effectively. In the past I have been active at least monthly on 20 or more communities. As time goes along, I find that there are specific communities that draw me in more than others. I am beginning to get better with not spreading myself so thin. It certainly helps to have pared them back significantly... not because I don't want to participate in them any longer - I have found fabulous and long lasting friendships in those groups - but because I don't feel that I am as effective as I could be and the stress of constantly trying to keep up with so many boards can be overwhelming. I never feel like I'm doing enough.

On one hand, I agree that having fewer online health communities would be better in the long run, but also understand that many people feel the desire for small close knit communities online just as in real life. There are advantages to those small, homey spaces. Others prefer big city living and large communities with lots going on. We are all different in what we're looking for in these situations. So long as that continues, I think there are going to be many choices out there for anyone looking for a place to feel at home.

Wouldn't collaboration be great?! United Communities of (illness name) Separate and intimate, yet powerful in its whole.

What's the value of an online health community?

You need to be a member of WEGO Health to add comments!