SynthesisJournal of medical Internet research2022
Evaluating the Effectiveness of Internet-Based Communication for Public Health: Systematic Review.
Synthesis 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 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- A Model of Social Media Effects in Public Health Communication Campaigns: Systematic Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2023Pooled it
- Health anxiety and collective sense-making in the Chinese social media sphere: a topic modeling assessment of Weibo chatters.BMC public health · 2026Article
- How the heart team is portrayed in online news.JTCVS open · 2026Article
- Platform-mediated patient access to apical surgery information on Chinese short-video platforms: a cross-sectional study of clinical accuracy, transparency, and misinformation risk.Frontiers in oral health · 2026Article
- Platform compliance governance in digital public health communication: effects of emergency health knowledge dissemination on protective behaviors.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Promoting healthy lifestyles in childhood: can a social media campaign targeting parents and carers be a valuable tool?BMC public health · 2025Article
- Evaluation of the quality and reliability of Chinese content about orthognathic surgery on BiliBili and TikTok: a cross-sectional study.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Chicago Public Health Department Social Media Communications on Twitter During the COVID-19 Pandemic and the Mpox Epidemic: Cross-Sectional Content Analysis.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- Bridging the gap: empowering patients as research partners through a structured training program.Research involvement and engagement · 2025Article
- Global quality scores of Brazilian public health system-related YouTubeTM videos and their users' engagement.Brazilian oral research · 2024Article
- Impact of strategies to mitigate misinformation in diverse settings and populations: a protocol for a living evidence synthesis.BMJ open · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCommunicating strategically is a key issue for health organizations. Over the past decade, health care communication via social media and websites has generated a great deal of studies examining different realities of communication strategies. However, when it comes to systematic reviews, there is fragmentary evidence on this type of communication.
objectiveThe aim of this systematic review was to summarize the evidence on web institutional health communication for public health authorities to evaluate possible aim-specific key points based on these existing studies.
methodsGuided by the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) statement, we conducted a comprehensive review across 2 electronic databases (PubMed and Web of Science) from January 1, 2011, to October 7, 2021, searching for studies investigating institutional health communication. In total, 2 independent researchers (AN and SS) reviewed the articles for inclusion, and the assessment of methodological quality was based on the Kmet appraisal checklist.
resultsA total of 78 articles were selected. Most studies (35/78, 45%) targeted health promotion and disease prevention, followed by crisis communication (24/78, 31%), general health (13/78, 17%), and misinformation correction and health promotion (6/78, 8%). Engagement and message framing were the most analyzed aspects. Few studies (14/78, 18%) focused on campaign effectiveness. Only 23% (18/78) of the studies had an experimental design. The Kmet evaluation was used to distinguish studies presenting a solid structure from lacking studies. In particular, considering the 0.75-point threshold, 36% (28/78) of the studies were excluded. Studies above this threshold were used to identify a series of aim-specific and medium-specific suggestions as the communication strategies used differed greatly.
conclusionsOverall, the findings suggest that no single strategy works best in the case of web-based health care communication. The extreme variability of outcomes and the lack of a unitary measure for assessing the end points of a specific campaign or study lead us to reconsider the tools we use to evaluate the efficacy of web-based health 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.