Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31206534›Full record

ArticlePloS one2019

Evaluating the predictability of medical conditions from social media posts.

Raina M Merchant, David A Asch, Patrick Crutchley, Lyle H Ungar, Sharath C Guntuku, Johannes C Eichstaedt, Shawndra Hill, Kevin Padrez, Robert J Smith, H Andrew Schwartz

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 36 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
36citing papers in PubMed
–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

36 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Digital phenotyping and ASCVD risk: An exploratory cross-sectional analysis using online behavioral data.American heart journal plus : cardiology research and practice · 2026
    Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Observational
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

10 authors.

Raina M MerchantPenn Medicine Center for Digital Health, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-9801-6881
David A AschPenn Medicine Center for Digital Health, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States of America.
Patrick CrutchleyPenn Medicine Center for Digital Health, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0003-4400-9309
Lyle H UngarPenn Medicine Center for Digital Health, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States of America.
Sharath C GuntukuPenn Medicine Center for Digital Health, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-2929-0035
Johannes C EichstaedtPositive Psychology Center, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States of America.
Shawndra HillPenn Medicine Center for Digital Health, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States of America.
Kevin PadrezPenn Medicine Center for Digital Health, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States of America.
Robert J SmithPenn Medicine Center for Digital Health, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0001-9746-1230
H Andrew SchwartzPenn Medicine Center for Digital Health, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States of America.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We studied whether medical conditions across 21 broad categories were predictable from social media content across approximately 20 million words written by 999 consenting patients. Facebook language significantly improved upon the prediction accuracy of demographic variables for 18 of the 21 disease categories; it was particularly effective at predicting diabetes and mental health conditions including anxiety, depression and psychoses. Social media data are a quantifiable link into the otherwise elusive daily lives of patients, providing an avenue for study and assessment of behavioral and environmental disease risk factors. Analogous to the genome, social media data linked to medical diagnoses can be banked with patients' consent, and an encoding of social media language can be used as markers of disease risk, serve as a screening tool, and elucidate disease epidemiology. In what we believe to be the first report linking electronic medical record data with social media data from consenting patients, we identified that patients' Facebook status updates can predict many health conditions, suggesting opportunities to use social media data to determine disease onset or exacerbation and to conduct social media-based health interventions.

Indexed as

DiseaseLanguageMental HealthModels, BiologicalSocial MediaDepressionDepressive DisorderDiabetes MellitusDiagnosisElectronic Health RecordsFemaleHumansMaleMental Disorders

Identifiers

PMID31206534
PMCPMC6576767

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC0
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.