ArticleBundesgesundheitsblatt, Gesundheitsforschung, Gesundheitsschutz2021
[Sexual health information on social media: a systematic scoping review].
Article in Bundesgesundheitsblatt, Gesundheitsforschung, Gesundheitsschutz, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- [Pregnancy termination on YouTube, Instagram, and TikTok: a content and quality analysis].Bundesgesundheitsblatt, Gesundheitsforschung, Gesundheitsschutz · 2026Article
- Exploring prevalence of risky sexual behaviour among adolescents in high schools: A systematic review.SAGE open medicine · 2026Review
- Using social media for male sexual health: what do we miss? A perspective article on good practices and missing evidence.International journal of impotence research · 2024Review
- [Parental sex education and sexual risk behavior of daughters and sons: findings from the representative survey "Youth Sexuality"].Bundesgesundheitsblatt, Gesundheitsforschung, Gesundheitsschutz · 2024Article
- [Contraception on YouTube, Instagram, and TikTok : A content and quality analysis].Bundesgesundheitsblatt, Gesundheitsforschung, Gesundheitsschutz · 2023Article
- [Contraception in the German-language Wikipedia: a content and quality analysis].Bundesgesundheitsblatt, Gesundheitsforschung, Gesundheitsschutz · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundInformation on sexual and reproductive health is increasingly disseminated via social media and reaches a large audience. RESEARCH
aimAgainst this background, the aim of this paper is to systematically summarize the international state of research on sexual health information on social media for the first time with a scoping review. Seven research questions were explored, relating to the amount (F1), methods (F2: content analysis, F3: quality analysis), and results (F4: providers, F5: target groups, F6: topics, F7: quality of information) of previous studies. MATERIALS AND
methodsThe study follows the PRISMA framework for scoping reviews as well as the Open Science approach. It is preregistered, and all materials (codebook with reliability coefficients) and data (list of identified studies and coding of studies) are available on the Open Science Foundation server.
resultsA total of 69 studies with 72 data sets were identified, with more than half of the publications referring to YouTube (F1). Qualitative and quantitative methods of content analysis are used equally (F2) and quality analyses are rare (F3). Health laypersons dominate as the information providers (F4). The target groups are mostly unspecified (F5). The health information on social media examined in the previous studies covers a broad range of topics (F6). Where quality assessments were made, they tended to be negative (F7). DISCUSSION: More research is needed to better understand sexual and reproductive health information on social media and to promote its quality and constructive use.
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.