Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28207365›Full record

ArticleThe American journal of bioethics : AJOB2017

Using Social Media as a Research Recruitment Tool: Ethical Issues and Recommendations.

Luke Gelinas, Robin Pierce, Sabune Winkler, I Glenn Cohen, Holly Fernandez Lynch, Barbara E Bierer

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in The American journal of bioethics : AJOB, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 153 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
153citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

153 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Article
  9. Educators, Not Influencers: Health Content Creator Perspectives on Research Recruitment Collaboration.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2026
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Observational
  19. Article
  20. Article

93 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Luke Gelinasa Petrie-Flom Center at Harvard Law School and Harvard Catalyst.
Robin Piercea Petrie-Flom Center at Harvard Law School and Harvard Catalyst.
Sabune Winklerb Harvard Catalyst.
I Glenn Cohena Petrie-Flom Center at Harvard Law School and Harvard Catalyst.
Holly Fernandez Lynchc Petrie-Flom Center at Harvard Law School, Harvard Catalyst, and Harvard Medical School.
Barbara E Biererd Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, and Harvard Catalyst.

Funding

Harvard Clinical and Translational Science CenterUL1TR001102 · NCATS · HARVARD MEDICAL SCHOOL · PI NADLER, LEE MARSHALL · 2013 to 2017
$106.2M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR001102
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The use of social media as a recruitment tool for research with humans is increasing, and likely to continue to grow. Despite this, to date there has been no specific regulatory guidance and there has been little in the bioethics literature to guide investigators and institutional review boards (IRBs) faced with navigating the ethical issues such use raises. We begin to fill this gap by first defending a nonexceptionalist methodology for assessing social media recruitment; second, examining respect for privacy and investigator transparency as key norms governing social media recruitment; and, finally, analyzing three relatively novel aspects of social media recruitment: (i) the ethical significance of compliance with website "terms of use"; (ii) the ethics of recruiting from the online networks of research participants; and (iii) the ethical implications of online communication from and between participants. Two checklists aimed at guiding investigators and IRBs through the ethical issues are included as appendices.

Indexed as

Biomedical ResearchConfidentialityEthics, ResearchHumansInformed ConsentPatient SelectionPhysician-Patient RelationsSocial Mediaethicsprivacyrecruitmentresearchsocial mediatransparency

Identifiers

PMID28207365
PMCPMC5324729

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.