ArticleFoods (Basel, Switzerland)2022
Nutrition-Related Content on Instagram in the United States of America: Analytical Cross-Sectional Study.
Article in Foods (Basel, Switzerland), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Public knowledge of ultra-processed foods: Insights from a national survey of Australian adults.Nutrition journal · 2026Article
- From plate to post: exploring representations of #familymeals through a content analysis of Instagram.Health promotion international · 2025Article
- #Fail: the quality and accuracy of nutrition-related information by influential Australian Instagram accounts.The international journal of behavioral nutrition and physical activity · 2024Article
- Nutrition-Related Information on Instagram: A Content Analysis of Posts by Popular Australian Accounts.Nutrients · 2023Article
- The Importance of Behavioral and Native Factors on COVID-19 Infection and Severity: Insights from a Preliminary Cross-Sectional Study.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe Internet is today the largest platform for food distribution, and there are concerns about the impact that digital marketing has in the field of nutrition by promoting non-evidence-based recommendations. The purpose of this study was to describe the user profile that draws on Instagram to follow nutrition-related content versus not, and to analyze the frequency and type of content of the information provided by nutritional influencers.
methodsA cross-sectional study involving randomly selected United States residents having an Instagram account was performed. Participants completed an anonymous online survey link.
resultsFrom 898 respondents, 78.7% were women, and 75.6% were Millennials. Scientific evidence present in the posts was 14.3%. Influencers promoted a product or a brand in more than 90% of posts. Women followed more nutrition-related content than men (
conclusionsWomen and Millennials followed more nutrition-related content. Scientific evidence was scarce and commercial interest in the network was evident. The vast majority of the posts were not based on scientific evidence and instead promoted a product/supplement.
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.