ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2020
Assessing the Credibility and Authenticity of Social Media Content for Applications in Health Communication: Scoping Review.
Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 37 papers.
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
37 citing papers in PubMed.
- Social Media Health Information Formats and Endometriosis Treatment-Seeking Intentions: A Randomized Controlled Trial.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2026Trial
- Misinformation mayhem: the effects of TikTok content on ADHD knowledge, stigma, and treatment-seeking intentions.European child & adolescent psychiatry · 2025Trial
- Designing Pleasure-Centered, Culturally Relevant PrEP Messaging for Black Gay, Bisexual, Queer, Same-Gender-Loving, and Other Men Who have Sex with Men (SGL/MSM) in New York City.AIDS and behavior · 2026Article
- Determinants of medical crowdfunding information sharing attitudes through integrated source credibility and technology acceptance models.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Quality, interaction, and platform-creator heterogeneity of DR short videos on Douyin and Bilibili: a cross-sectional study.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Can Medical Chatbots Trigger Disinhibition and Encourage Health Information Disclosure?Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Quality and reliability of pancreaticoduodenectomy-related videos on TikTok, Bilibili, and YouTube: a cross-sectional content analysis.Frontiers in surgery · 2026Article
- Who sends the message matters: social media messengers and adolescent eating.Frontiers in nutrition · 2026Article
- From digital stimulus to hiking participation: an SOR-based examination of the internal associations between social media hiking content and participation intention in Chinese generation Z consumers.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
- Unqualified Advice and Product Promotions: Analysis of Health and Nutrition Content on Social Media Consumed by Young Adults.Nutrients · 2025Article
- Internet Memes as Drivers of Health Narratives and Infodemics: Integrative Review.JMIR infodemiology · 2025Review
- [Misinformation and disinformation about dietary supplements in social media: limiting the risks, seizing the opportunities, and shaping structures].Bundesgesundheitsblatt, Gesundheitsforschung, Gesundheitsschutz · 2025Article
- Barriers to Public Health Trust-Building Using Social Media: A Qualitative Analysis.Disaster medicine and public health preparedness · 2025Article
- Promoting Public Engagement in Palliative and End-of-Life Care Discussions on Chinese Social Media: Model Development and Analysis.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- Formative Evaluation of Suicide Prevention Websites for Men: Qualitative Study with Men at Risk of Suicide and with Potential Gatekeepers.JMIR formative research · 2025Article
- Review
- Dialogue pathways and narrative analysis in health communication within the social media environment: an empirical study based on user behavior-a case study of China.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
- A Multidimensional Approach for Evaluating Reality in Social Media: Mixed Methods Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2024Article
- Nutrients and Foods Recommended for Blood Pressure Control on Twitter in Japan: Content Analysis.Journal of medical Internet research · 2024Article
- Association between health-related social media use and E-cigarette use among current cigarette users: the roles of anti-tobacco messages and harm perception.BMC public health · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundNutrition science is currently facing issues regarding the public's perception of its credibility, with social media (SM) influencers increasingly becoming a key source for nutrition-related information with high engagement rates. Source credibility and, to an extent, authenticity have been widely studied in marketing and communications but have not yet been considered in the context of nutrition or health communication. Thus, an investigation into the factors that impact perceived source and message credibility and authenticity is of interest to inform health communication on SM.
objectiveThis study aims to explore the factors that impact message and source credibility (which includes trustworthiness and expertise) or authenticity judgments on SM platforms to better inform nutrition science SM communication best practices.
methodsA total of 6 databases across a variety of disciplines were searched in March 2019. The inclusion criteria were experimental studies, studies focusing on microblogs, studies focusing on healthy adult populations, and studies focusing on either source credibility or authenticity. Exclusion criteria were studies involving participants aged under 18 years and clinical populations, gray literature, blogs, WeChat conversations, web-based reviews, non-English papers, and studies not involving participants' perceptions.
resultsOverall, 22 eligible papers were included, giving a total of 25 research studies. Among these studies, Facebook and Twitter were the most common SM platforms investigated. The most effective communication style differed depending on the SM platform. Factors reported to impact credibility included language used online, expertise heuristics, and bandwagon heuristics. No papers were found that assessed authenticity.
conclusionsCredibility and authenticity are important concepts studied extensively in the marketing and communications disciplines; however, further research is required in a health context. Instagram is a less-researched platform in comparison with Facebook and Twitter.
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.