Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35040796›Full record

ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2022

Young Adults' Use of Different Social Media Platforms for Health Information: Insights From Web-Based Conversations.

Megan S C Lim, Annika Molenaar, Linda Brennan, Mike Reid, Tracy McCaffrey

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 132 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
132citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
34.4field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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

132 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 233 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Sharing Antivaping Social Media Messages.The Journal of adolescent health : official publication of the Society for Adolescent Medicine · 2025
    Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. When Risk Is Invisible: Alcohol-Cancer Communication on Social Media.Alcohol, clinical & experimental research · 2026
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article

72 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Megan S C LimBurnet Institute, Melbourne, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-3136-6761
Annika MolenaarMonash University, Melbourne, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-6037-4133
Linda BrennanRMIT University, Melbourne, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-1964-1487
Mike ReidRMIT University, Melbourne, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-0397-2556
Tracy McCaffreyMonash University, Melbourne, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-9699-3083
Monash University · AURMIT University · AUBurnet Institute · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSocial media-delivered health promotion has demonstrated limited uptake and effectiveness among young adults. Understanding how young adults interact with existing social media platforms for health might provide insight for future health promotion interventions.

objectiveThe aim of this study is to describe how young adults interact with different social media platforms for health and health information.

methodsWe used a web-based conversation methodology to collect data from 165 young adults aged 18 to 24 years. Participants participated in an extended conversation with moderators and other participants about health and social media. They were prompted to discuss how they find health information, how they use different social media platforms, and how they evaluate the trustworthiness of information. A thematic qualitative analysis was applied to the data.

resultsYoung adults spent a lot of time scrolling through Facebook newsfeeds, which often resulted in seeing health-related content either from their friends, news sources, or advertisements. Some actively sought out information about specific health areas by joining groups or following relevant pages. YouTube was considered a useful source for learning about everything and was often the go-to when searching for information or advice (after Google). Young adults found the video format easy to learn from. They stated that they could identify accurate YouTube health content by cross-checking multiple videos, by feeling that the presenter was real and relatable, or just through instinctively judging a video's credibility. Instagram was a source of inspiration for health and wellness from those whose lives were dedicated to healthy lifestyles and fitness. Twitter, Tumblr, and Snapchat were rarely used for health information.

conclusionsMost young adults obtain health information from social media, both actively and through passive exposure. Participants indicated looking to social media influencers for health and lifestyle inspiration and judged the credibility of sources by appearance and instinct. Health experts should try to use the channels in the way that young adults already use them; use relatable role models on Instagram and YouTube, eye-catching headlines and support groups on Facebook, and easy to follow instruction videos via YouTube. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): RR2-10.1111/1747-0080.12448.

Indexed as

Social MediaCommunicationHealth PromotionHumansLife StyleYoung AdultFacebookhealth communicationhealth informationInstagramsocial mediayoung adultsYouTube

Identifiers

PMID35040796
PMCPMC8808344
OpenAlexW4205822631

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.