Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32948033›Full record

ArticleNutrients2020

Learning the Language of Social Media: A Comparison of Engagement Metrics and Social Media Strategies Used by Food and Nutrition-Related Social Media Accounts.

Amy M Barklamb, Annika Molenaar, Linda Brennan, Stephanie Evans, Jamie Choong, Emma Herron, Mike Reid, Tracy A McCaffrey

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Nutrients, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Participant recruitment for paediatric research using social media: A practical 'how-to' guide for researchers.Nutrition & dietetics : the journal of the Dietitians Association of Australia · 2023
    Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

8 authors.

Amy M BarklambDepartment of Nutrition, Dietetics and Food, Monash University, Notting Hill, Melbourne 3168, Australia.
Annika MolenaarDepartment of Nutrition, Dietetics and Food, Monash University, Notting Hill, Melbourne 3168, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-6037-4133
Linda BrennanSchool of Media and Communications, RMIT University, Melbourne 3000, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-1964-1487
Stephanie EvansDepartment of Nutrition, Dietetics and Food, Monash University, Notting Hill, Melbourne 3168, Australia.
Jamie ChoongDepartment of Nutrition, Dietetics and Food, Monash University, Notting Hill, Melbourne 3168, Australia.
Emma HerronDepartment of Nutrition, Dietetics and Food, Monash University, Notting Hill, Melbourne 3168, Australia.
Mike ReidSchool of Economics, Finance and Marketing, RMIT University, Melbourne 3000, Australia.
Tracy A McCaffreyDepartment of Nutrition, Dietetics and Food, Monash University, Notting Hill, Melbourne 3168, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-9699-3083

Funding

National Health and Medical Research Council GNT1115496
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Health promoters have been unable to reach and engage people on social media (SM) to the extent that food industry brands and lifestyle personalities have. The objective of this study was to identify the SM post strategies associated with higher engagement in nutrition and food-related posts using a retrospective content analysis. The six most engaging posts from both Facebook and Instagram's 10 most successful nutrition and food-related accounts were analysed across four fields. Subjective and objective post strategies were coded on 736 posts, and associations with engagement were explored using the Least Absolute Shrinkage and Selection Operator (LASSO). Lifestyle personalities recorded the highest absolute engagement, while health promoters recorded the highest engagement relative to follower count. Strategies associated with higher Facebook engagement included using hashtags and prompting engagement through announcements, while on Instagram, higher engagement was associated with higher caption counts, providing health information links, prompting engagement through strategies that require an action, and using humorous strategies. Strategies associated with lower Instagram engagement included reposted content, general encouragement to eat strategies, encouragement to exercise strategies, not inducing any emotion/hedonic sensations, and providing a negative tone. Health promoters should adapt SM posts to the different SM platforms and utilise strategies associated with higher engagement to engage with their audience on SM.

Indexed as

Food IndustryNutritional SciencesAustraliaHealth CommunicationHealth PromotionHumansRetrospective StudiesSocial MediaFacebookhealth promotionInstagramnutritionsocial mediayoung adults

Identifiers

PMID32948033
PMCPMC7551727

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.