Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32992073›Full record

SynthesisComprehensive psychiatry2020

Social media recruitment for mental health research: A systematic review.

Catherine Sanchez, Adrienne Grzenda, Andrea Varias, Alik S Widge, Linda L Carpenter, William M McDonald, Charles B Nemeroff, Ned H Kalin, Glenn Martin, Mauricio Tohen and 5 more

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Comprehensive psychiatry, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 55 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
55citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Social Media Use for Health Purposes: Systematic Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2021
    Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Long COVID Optimal Health Programme to Enhance Mental and Physical Health: A Feasibility Randomised Controlled Trial.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2025
    Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Internet Gaming Disorder and Nonmedical Prescription Drug Use: The Moderating Role of Student Status.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2026
    Article
  8. Observational
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Observational
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Observational
  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

15 authors.

Catherine SanchezDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.
Adrienne GrzendaDepartment of Psychiatry and Biobehavioral Sciences, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Andrea VariasDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.
Alik S WidgeDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, University of Minnesota, MN, USA.
Linda L CarpenterDepartment of Psychiatry and Human Behavior, Butler Hospital and Warren Alpert Medical School, Brown University, Providence, RI, USA.
William M McDonaldDepartment of Psychiatry and Human Behavior, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Charles B NemeroffDepartment of Psychiatry, University of Texas at Austin Dell Medical School, Austin, TX, USA.
Ned H KalinDepartment of Psychiatry, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, WI, USA.
Glenn MartinDepartment of Psychiatry, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY, USA.
Mauricio TohenDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, University of New Mexico Health Sciences Center, Albuquerque, NM, USA.
Maria Filippou-FryeDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.
Drew RamseyDepartment of Psychiatry, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA.
Eleni LinosDepartment of Dermatology, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.
Christina MangurianDepartment of Psychiatry, Weill Institute for Neurosciences, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA; UCSF Center for Vulnerable Populations, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA; UCSF Philip R. Lee Institute for Health Policy Studies, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA.
Carolyn I RodriguezDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA; Veterans Affairs Palo Alto Health Care System, Palo Alto, CA, USA. Electronic address: carolynrodriguez@stanford.edu.

Funding

Stanford Medicine Center for Longevity and Healthy Aging Research Education CoreP30AG059307 · NIA · STANFORD UNIVERSITY · PI PERIYAKOIL, VYJEYANTHI S · 2018 to 2025
$4.9M
NMDAR Modulation As A Therapeutic Target and Probe of Neural Dysfunction in OCDR01MH105461 · NIMH · STANFORD UNIVERSITY · PI RODRIGUEZ, CAROLYN I · 2015 to 2020
$4.2M
Using Medicaid data to advance care for people with schizophrenia at risk for HIV (Medicaid-DASH)R01MH112420 · NIMH · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI MANGURIAN, CHRISTINA · 2017 to 2021
$3.6M
Targeted Advertising for Cancer PreventionDP2CA225433 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI LINOS, ELENI · 2017 to 2019
$2.9M
Patient Oriented Research in Vulnerable Populations with Skin DiseaseK24AR075060 · NIAMS · STANFORD UNIVERSITY · PI Eleni Linos · 2019 to 2026
$1.6M
NCI NIH HHS DP2 CA225433NIAMS NIH HHS K24 AR075060NIA NIH HHS P30 AG059307NIMH NIH HHS R01 MH105461NIMH NIH HHS R01 MH112420
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSocial media holds exciting promise for advancing mental health research recruitment, however, the extent and efficacy to which these platforms are currently in use are underexplored.

objectiveA systematic review was conducted to characterize the current use and efficacy of social media in recruiting participants for mental health research.

methodA literature review was performed using MEDLINE, EMBASE, and PsychINFO. Only non-duplicative manuscripts written in the English language and published between 1/1/2004-3/31/2019 were selected for further screening. Data extracted included study type and design, participant inclusion criteria, social media platform, advertising strategy, final recruited sample size, recruitment location, year, monetary incentives, comparison to other recruitment methods if performed, and final cost per participant.

resultsA total of 176 unique studies that used social media for mental health research recruitment were reviewed. The majority of studies were cross-sectional (62.5%) in design and recruited adults. Facebook was overwhelmingly the recruitment platform of choice (92.6%), with the use of paid advertisements being the predominant strategy (60.8%). Of the reviewed studies, substance abuse (43.8%) and mood disorders (15.3%) were the primary subjects of investigation. In 68.3% of studies, social media recruitment performed as well as or better than traditional recruitment methods in the number and cost of final enrolled participants. The majority of studies used Facebook for recruitment at a median cost per final recruited study participant of $19.47. In 55.6% of the studies, social media recruitment was the more cost-effective recruitment method when compared to traditional methods (e.g., referrals, mailing).

conclusionSocial media appears to be an effective and economical recruitment tool for mental health research. The platform raises methodological and privacy concerns not covered in current research regulations that warrant additional consideration.

Indexed as

Mental HealthSocial MediaAdultAdvertisingCross-Sectional StudiesHumansResearch DesignRecruitmentResearchSocial media

Identifiers

PMID32992073
PMCPMC7704547

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.