Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25865399›Full record

ArticleJournal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education2016

"Obesity is the New Major Cause of Cancer": Connections Between Obesity and Cancer on Facebook and Twitter.

Erin E Kent, Abby Prestin, Anna Gaysynsky, Kasia Galica, Robin Rinker, Kaitlin Graff, Wen-Ying Sylvia Chou

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
4.6field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

15 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 40 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Using Facebook for Qualitative Research: A Brief Primer.Journal of medical Internet research · 2019
    Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Erin E KentOutcomes Research Branch, Healthcare Deliver Research Program, Division of Cancer Control and Population Sciences, National Cancer Institute, Rockville, MD, USA. Erin.Kent@nih.gov.ORCID 0000-0003-2503-2191
Abby PrestinHealth Communications and Informatics Branch, Behavioral Research Program, Division of Cancer Control and Population Sciences, National Cancer Institute, Rockville, MD, USA.
Anna GaysynskyHealth Communications and Informatics Branch, Behavioral Research Program, Division of Cancer Control and Population Sciences, National Cancer Institute, Rockville, MD, USA.
Kasia GalicaHealth Communications and Informatics Branch, Behavioral Research Program, Division of Cancer Control and Population Sciences, National Cancer Institute, Rockville, MD, USA.
Robin RinkerOffice of Advocacy Relations, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD, USA.
Kaitlin GraffWashington University, St. Louis, MO, USA.
Wen-Ying Sylvia ChouHealth Communications and Informatics Branch, Behavioral Research Program, Division of Cancer Control and Population Sciences, National Cancer Institute, Rockville, MD, USA.
National Cancer Institute · USWashington University in St. Louis · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Social media interactions can inform public health risk perceptions. While research has examined the risk relationships between obesity and cancer, public attitudes about their associations remain largely unknown. We explored how these constructs were discussed together on two social media platforms. Publicly accessible Facebook and Twitter posts from a 2-month period in 2012 containing references to obesity ("obese/obesity," "overweight," and "fat") and cancer-related words were extracted (N = 3702 posts). Data cleaning yielded a final set of 1382 posts (Facebook: N = 291; Twitter: N = 1091). Using a mixed-methods approach, themes were inductively generated, and sentiment valence, structural elements, and epistemic stance were coded. Seven relational themes emerged: obesity is associated with cancer (n = 389), additional factors are associated with both obesity and cancer (n = 335), obesity causes cancer (n = 85), cancer causes obesity (n = 6), obesity is not linked to cancer (n = 13), co-occurrence (n = 492), and obesity is valued differently than cancer (n = 60). Fifty-nine percent of posts focused on an associative or causal link between obesity and cancer. Thirty-one percent of posts contained positive and/or negative sentiment. Facebook was more likely to contain any sentiment, but Twitter contained proportionately more negative sentiment. Concurrent qualitative analysis revealed a dominance of individual blame for overweight/obese persons and more support and empathy for cancer survivors. Our study reflects wide recognition of the evidence linking obesity to increased risk of cancer, a diverse set of factors perceived to be dually associated with both conditions and differing attribution of responsibility. We demonstrate that social media monitoring can provide an important gauge of public health risk perception.

Indexed as

Public HealthHumansNeoplasmsObesitySocial MediaCancerMixed methodsObesityRisk perceptionSocial media

Identifiers

PMID25865399
OpenAlexW2000427966

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.