ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2022
Exploring the Linkages of Digital Food Communication and Analog Food Behavior: A Scoping Review.
Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Behavioural and cognitive changes in young adults towards food and nutrition after exposure to digital food communication: a mixed-methods systematic review.The international journal of behavioral nutrition and physical activity · 2025Pooled it
- Weight loss journeys: Exploring social influences and determinants of health in an exploratory rural German intervention.PloS one · 2025Article
- 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The linkages of digital food communication on social media platforms and analog food behavior of social media users are widely discussed in media and research, but less differentiated. Due to the interdisciplinary nature of the research field, the scientific studies are characterized by great heterogeneity in approaching the role of communication and modelling of food behavior, and thus also the conclusions on how digital food communication might be linked to analog food behavior. There is still much uncertainty regarding the relationship and underlying assumptions between digital communication and analog action. The rationale of this scoping review is to systematically summarize the findings of this heterogeneous body of knowledge. The importance and originality of this review are that it focuses explicitly on studies that provide insights into the nexus of digital food communication and analog food behavior, be it in the theoretical foundation, the results, or their interpretation. It draws on a socio-ecological model of food behavior that depicts food behavior variables in different domains and uses a differentiated categorization of food behavior (food choice, dietary intake, and eating behavior) to synthesize the results. Using the Web of Science and PubMed databases, 267 abstracts were identified and screened, of which 20 articles met the inclusion criteria and were selected for full-text analysis. The review offers some important insights on how different variables of the socio-ecological model of food behavior are related to digital food communication and different areas of analog food behavior. This review provides a more discerning understanding of which aspects of analog food behavior may be linked to social media food communication and in which ways. Implications are derived to reflect the role of communication in previous models of food behavior by adding a more nuanced and cross-cutting understanding of food communication.
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.