Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35019982›Full record

ArticleJAMA network open2022

Nutritional Analysis of Foods and Beverages Posted in Social Media Accounts of Highly Followed Celebrities.

Bradley P Turnwald, Kathryn G Anderson, Hazel Rose Markus, Alia J Crum

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA network open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing 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

13 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Bradley P TurnwaldBooth School of Business, University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois.
Kathryn G AndersonDepartment of Psychology, Stanford University, Stanford, California.
Hazel Rose MarkusDepartment of Psychology, Stanford University, Stanford, California.
Alia J CrumDepartment of Psychology, Stanford University, Stanford, California.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Celebrity social media posts engage millions of young followers daily, but the nutritional quality of foods and beverages in such posts, sponsored and unsponsored, is unknown. Objective: To quantify the nutritional quality of foods and beverages depicted in social media accounts of highly followed celebrities and assess whether nutritional quality is associated with post sponsorship, celebrity profession or gender, and followers' likes and comments. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study analyzed the content of food- and beverage-containing posts from Instagram (a photo- and video-sharing social media platform) accounts of 181 highly followed athletes, actors, actresses, television personalities, and music artists. Data were collected from May 2019 to March 2020. Main Outcomes and Measures: The nutritional quality of foods and beverages posted in celebrity social media accounts was rated using the Nutrient Profile Index (NPI) based on the sugar, sodium, energy, saturated fat, fiber, protein, and fruit and/or vegetable content per 100-g sample (a score of 0 indicated least healthy and 100, healthiest); foods with scores less than 64 and beverages with scores less than 70 were rated as "less healthy." Secondary outcomes were whether the nutritional quality of foods and beverages in social media posts was associated with post sponsorship, celebrity profession or gender, and followers' likes and comments. Mixed-effects regression models were used to estimate how outcomes differed across fixed effects. Results: The sample included social media accounts of 181 celebrities (66 actors, actresses, and television personalities [36.5%]; 64 music artists [35.4%]; and 51 athletes [28.2%]). A total of 102 celebrities (56.4%) were male, and the median age was 32 years (range, 17-73 years). Among 3065 social media posts containing 5180 total foods and beverages (2467 foods [47.6%]; 2713 beverages [52.4%]), snacks and sweets (920 [37.3%] of the foods) and alcoholic beverages (1375 [50.7%] of the beverages) were most common. Overall, 158 celebrity social media accounts (87.3%) earned a less healthy overall food nutrition score and 162 (89.5%) earned a less healthy overall beverage nutrition score, which would be unhealthy enough to fail legal youth advertising limits in the UK. For foods, social media posts with healthier nutrition scores were associated with significantly fewer likes (b, -0.003; 95% CI, -0.006 to 0.000; P = .04) and comments (b, -0.006; 95% CI, -0.009 to -0.003; P < .001) from followers. For beverages, nutrition scores were not significantly associated with likes (b, -0.010; 95% CI, -0.025 to 0.005; P = .18) or comments (b, -0.003; 95% CI, -0.022 to 0.016; P = .73). Only 147 food- or beverage-containing posts (4.8%) were sponsored by food- or beverage-relevant companies. Beverages in sponsored posts contained more than twice as much alcohol as those in nonsponsored posts (10.8 g [95% CI, 9.3 g to 12.3 g] per 100 g of beverage vs 5.3 g [95% CI, 4.7 g to 5.9 g] per 100 g of beverage). Conclusions and Relevance: In this cross-sectional study, most highly followed celebrity social media accounts depicted an unhealthy profile of foods and beverages, primarily in nonsponsored posts. These results suggest that influential depictions of unhealthy food and beverage consumption on social media may be a sociocultural problem that extends beyond advertisements and sponsorships, reinforcing unhealthy consumption norms.

Indexed as

Famous PersonsAdolescentAdultAdvertisingAgedBeveragesCross-Sectional StudiesDiet, HealthyFemaleFinancial SupportHumansMaleMiddle AgedNutritive ValueSocial MediaUnited Kingdom

Identifiers

PMID35019982
PMCPMC8756336

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.