Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33461628›Full record

ArticleFertility research and practice2021

Fertility education: what's trending on Instagram.

Alexandra Peyser, Liat Goldstein, Christine Mullin, Randi H Goldman

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Fertility research and practice, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing 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

15 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Information about elective egg freezing on instagram reels: a content review.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2025
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Oocyte cryopreservation on TikTok and Instagram: Who is teaching whom?Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2024
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. 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

4 authors.

Alexandra PeyserDivision of Reproductive Endocrinology, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Northwell Health, North Shore University Hospital, 300 Community Drive, Manhasset, New York, 11030, USA. peysera@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7516-9810
Liat GoldsteinDivision of Reproductive Endocrinology, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Northwell Health, North Shore University Hospital, 300 Community Drive, Manhasset, New York, 11030, USA.
Christine MullinDivision of Reproductive Endocrinology, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Northwell Health, North Shore University Hospital, 300 Community Drive, Manhasset, New York, 11030, USA.
Randi H GoldmanDivision of Reproductive Endocrinology, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Northwell Health, North Shore University Hospital, 300 Community Drive, Manhasset, New York, 11030, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo determine the prevalence, authorship, and types of fertility-related information shared on Instagram targeted toward a new patient interested in fertility options using hashtag and content analysis. Secondary outcomes included comparison of post content stratified by author type (physicians versus patients).

methodsA list of ten hashtags consisting of fertility terms for the new patient was derived. Content analysis was performed in April 2019 on the top 50 and most recent 50 posts for each hashtag to determine authorship and content type. The distribution of fertility terms in posts made by physicians was compared to that of patients and differences in use of terms were analyzed.

resultsOur search yielded 3,393,636 posts. The two most popular hashtags were IVF (N = 912,049), and Infertility (N = 852,939). Authorship of the top posts for each hashtag (N = 1000) were as follows: patients (67 %), physicians (10 %), for-profit commercial groups (6.0 %), allied health professional (4.5 %), professional societies (1 %), and other (11 %). Of these posts, 60 % related to patient experiences, 10 % advertisements, 10 % outreach, and 8 % educational. Physicians were more likely to author posts related to oocyte cryopreservation compared to IVF, while patients were more likely to author posts about IVF (p < 0.0001).

conclusionsOver 3 million posts related to fertility were authored on Instagram. A majority of fertility posts are being mobilized by patients to publicly display and share their personal experiences. Concurrent with the rising utilization of planned oocyte cryopreservation, there is a trend toward physicians educating their patients about the process using social media as a platform. Physician participation on social media may offer a low-cost platform for networking and connecting with patients. Future studies examining the educational quality of posts by author type should be explored.

Indexed as

InfertilityInstagramIVFReproductive medicineSocial media

Identifiers

PMID33461628
PMCPMC7812639

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.