Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29567633›Full record

ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2018

Web 2.0 Tools in the Prevention of Curable Sexually Transmitted Diseases: Scoping Review.

María Sanz-Lorente, Carmina Wanden-Berghe, Ramón Castejón-Bolea, Javier Sanz-Valero

Open access · goldAbstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
2.6field-weighted citation impact, top 10% 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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 33 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Infodemiology and Infoveillance: Scoping Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2020
    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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

María Sanz-Lorente *Department of Public Health & History of Science, School of Medicine, University Miguel Hernandez of Elche, Alicante, Spain.ORCID 0000-0002-6983-739X
Carmina Wanden-Berghe *Foundation for the Promotion of Health and Biomedical Research from the Valencian Community, University General Hospital of Alicante, Alicante, Spain.ORCID 0000-0002-6871-5737
Ramón Castejón-Bolea *Department of Public Health & History of Science, School of Medicine, University Miguel Hernandez of Elche, Alicante, Spain.ORCID 0000-0002-0825-5548
Javier Sanz-Valero *Department of Public Health & History of Science, School of Medicine, University Miguel Hernandez of Elche, Alicante, Spain.ORCID 0000-0002-8735-0075
Universitat de Miguel Hernández d'Elx · ES

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe internet is now the primary source of information that young people use to get information on issues related to sex, contraception, and sexually transmitted infections.

objectiveThe goal of the research was to review the scientific literature related to the use of Web 2.0 tools as opposed to other strategies in the prevention of curable sexually transmitted diseases (STDs).

methodsA scoping review was performed on the documentation indexed in the bibliographic databases MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, Scopus, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Web of Science, Literatura Latinoamericana y del Caribe en Ciencias de la Salud, PsycINFO, Educational Resources Information Center, the databases of Centro Superior de Investigaciones Científicas in Spain, and the Índice Bibliográfico Español de Ciencias de la Salud from the first available date according to the characteristics of each database until April 2017. The equation search was realized by means of the using of descriptors together with the consultation of the fields of title register and summary with free terms. Bibliographies of the selected papers were searched for additional articles.

resultsA total of 627 references were retrieved, of which 6 papers were selected after applying the inclusion and exclusion criteria. The STDs studied were chlamydia, gonorrhea, and syphilis. The Web 2.0 tools used were Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and YouTube. The 6 papers used Web 2.0 in the promotion of STD detection.

conclusionsWeb 2.0 tools have demonstrated a positive effect on the promotion of prevention strategies for STDs and can help attract and link youth to campaigns related to sexual health. These tools can be combined with other interventions. In any case, Web 2.0 and especially Facebook have all the potential to become essential instruments for public health.

Indexed as

FemaleHumansMaleSexually Transmitted DiseasesSocial Mediainternetsexually transmitted diseases, bacterialsocial mediawebcasts

Identifiers

PMID29567633
PMCPMC5887040
OpenAlexW2792586364

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.