ArticleDigital health
Targeted advertisement of chlamydia screening on social media: A mixed-methods analysis.
Article in Digital health. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
17 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 32 citations in OpenAlex.
- A Model of Social Media Effects in Public Health Communication Campaigns: Systematic Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2023Pooled it
- What is the effectiveness of community-based health promotion campaigns on chlamydia screening uptake in young people and what barriers and facilitators have been identified? A mixed-methods systematic review.Sexually transmitted infections · 2022Pooled it
- Systematic Review on Information Technology Approaches to Evaluate the Impact of Public Health Campaigns: Real Cases and Possible Directions.Frontiers in public health · 2021Pooled it
- Key mechanisms for chlamydia control in Guangdong, China: a mixed-methods causal-loop analysis.BMC infectious diseases · 2026Article
- Leveraging Influencers to Reach and Engage Vulnerable Individuals With a Digital Health Intervention: Quasi-Experimental Field Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- Implementation of a Social Media Strategy for Public Health Promotion in Black, American Indian or Alaska Native, and Hispanic or Latino Communities During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Cross-Sectional Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2024Article
- Recruitment for Voluntary Video and Mobile HIV Testing on Social Media Platforms During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Cross-Sectional Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2024Article
- Marketing mental health services: a mixed-methods analysis of racially and ethnically diverse college students' engagement with and perspectives on U.S. university mental health clinics' websites.BMC health services research · 2024Article
- DépistaFest: The evaluation of an inclusive, positive, and playful STBBI screening campaign's effectiveness.Canadian journal of public health = Revue canadienne de sante publique · 2024Article
- Analyzing the reach of public health campaigns based on multidimensional aspects: the case of the syphilis epidemic in Brazil.BMC public health · 2021Article
- Article
- Feasibility study of peer-led and school-based social network Intervention (STASH) to promote adolescent sexual health.Pilot and feasibility studies · 2021Article
- Peer-to-Peer Sharing of Social Media Messages on Sexual Health in a School-Based Intervention: Opportunities and Challenges Identified in the STASH Feasibility Trial.Journal of medical Internet research · 2021Article
- Evaluation of the Sexual Health Behaviors of Black Male Adolescents and Young Adults Through Social Media Platforms: Web-Based Survey Study.JMIR public health and surveillance · 2020Article
- A Software Tool Aimed at Automating the Generation, Distribution, and Assessment of Social Media Messages for Health Promotion and Education Research.JMIR public health and surveillance · 2019Article
- Online public health promotion at the local level: An evaluation of four local authority-led marketing campaigns.Digital healthArticle
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveChlamydia is one of the most common sexually transmitted infections in teenagers and young adults. This study used a mixed-methods analysis to investigate targeted promotion of chlamydia home-testing on social media.
methodsOur first study, in which face-to-face interviews with young women were conducted, sought to explore their attitudes and preferences towards social media-based health promotion. Our second study used Facebook and Google analytics to examine visits to a chlamydia testing page (where chlamydia testing kits could be ordered online), both before and after a targeted Facebook-based health promotion campaign was conducted.
resultsThe interviews revealed Facebook to be the preferred choice of social media, with participants perceiving it to be a powerful and far-reaching platform for social interaction. Participants also highlighted several aspects of promotional content to be important at increasing engagement with the target population, including appropriate use of colour, level of interactivity, use of humour and anonymity. The website analysis showed a 277% increase in the direct entrance on the chlamydia testing kit page and a 41% increase in chlamydia test kit orders, in comparison with the baseline period prior to the intervention.
conclusionsThe findings support social media as an engaging medium for the online promotion of chlamydia self-testing and implicate Facebook advertising as a useful tool in addition to community-based chlamydia screening services. Future research needs to identify whether targeted social media-based health promotion could lead to higher chlamydia diagnosis rate in comparison to traditional communication channels.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.