ArticlePloS one2022
How social media data are being used to research the experience of mourning: A scoping review.
Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIncreasingly, people are using social media (SM) to express grief, and researchers are using this data to investigate the phenomenon of mourning. As this research progresses, it is important to understand how studies are being conducted and how authors are approaching ethical challenges related to SM data.
objectiveThe aim of this review was to explore how SM data are being used to research experiences of mourning through the following questions: a) 'Which topics related to mourning are being studied?'; b) 'What study designs have been used to analyse SM data'; c) 'What type of data (natural or generated) have been used?'; and d) 'How are ethical decisions being considered?'.
methodsThe JBI Scoping Review methodology guided this review. Eligibility criteria were determined using the PCC framework, and relevant key words and phrases derived from these criteria were used to search eight databases in September 2021 (CINAHL, Embase, LILACS, OpenGrey, ProQuest, PsycINFO, PubMed and Scopus). The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) guidelines were used to report the results of this review.
resultsDatabase searches resulted in 3418 records, of which, 89 met eligibility criteria. Four categories of grief and mourning were identified. Most records were qualitative in nature and used natural data. Only 20% of records reported ethics approval by an Institutional Review Board, with several including measures to protect participants, for example, using pseudonyms.
conclusionsThis unique review mapped the diverse range of mourning-related topics that have been investigated using SM data and highlighted the variability in approaches to data analysis. Ethical concerns relating to SM data collection are identified and discussed. This is an emerging and rapidly changing field of research that offers new opportunities and challenges for exploring the phenomenon of mourning.
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.