ArticleJMIR infodemiology
Twitter Trends for Celiac Disease and the Gluten-Free Diet: Cross-sectional Descriptive Analysis.
Article in JMIR infodemiology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Parental perspectives concerning gluten-free food insecurity in households with children with coeliac disease: take away messages for policy makers.Journal of nutritional science · 2026Article
- Use of technology to educate patients with celiac disease.Nutrition in clinical practice : official publication of the American Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition · 2025Review
- Combating Misinformation in Celiac Disease : Invited Commentary on "Unauthentic information about celiac disease on social networking pages: is it a matter of concern in celiac disease management?"Digestive diseases and sciences · 2024Article
- Mapping automatic social media information disorder. The role of bots and AI in spreading misleading information in society.PloS one · 2024Article
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 at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Background: Few studies have systematically analyzed information regarding chronic medical conditions and available treatments on social media. Celiac disease (CD) is an exemplar of the need to investigate web-based educational sources. CD is an autoimmune condition wherein the ingestion of gluten causes intestinal damage and, if left untreated by a strict gluten-free diet (GFD), can result in significant nutritional deficiencies leading to cancer, bone disease, and death. Adherence to the GFD can be difficult owing to cost and negative stigma, including misinformation about what gluten is and who should avoid it. Given the significant impact that negative stigma and common misunderstandings have on the treatment of CD, this condition was chosen to systematically investigate the scope and nature of sources and information distributed through social media. Objective: To address concerns related to educational social media sources, this study explored trends on the social media platform Twitter about CD and the GFD to identify primary influencers and the type of information disseminated by these influencers. Methods: This cross-sectional study used data mining to collect tweets and users who used the hashtags #celiac and #glutenfree from an 8-month time frame. Tweets were then analyzed to describe who is disseminating information via this platform and the content, source, and frequency of such information. Results: More content was posted for #glutenfree (1501.8 tweets per day) than for #celiac (69 tweets per day). A substantial proportion of the content was produced by a small percentage of contributors (ie, "Superuser"), who could be categorized as self-promotors (eg, bloggers, writers, authors; 13.9% of #glutenfree tweets and 22.7% of #celiac tweets), self-identified female family members (eg, mother; 4.3% of #glutenfree tweets and 8% of #celiac tweets), or commercial entities (eg, restaurants and bakeries). On the other hand, relatively few self-identified scientific, nonprofit, and medical provider users made substantial contributions on Twitter related to the GFD or CD (1% of #glutenfree tweets and 3.1% of #celiac tweets, respectively). Conclusions: Most material on Twitter was provided by self-promoters, commercial entities, or self-identified female family members, which may not have been supported by current medical and scientific practices. Researchers and medical providers could potentially benefit from contributing more to this space to enhance the web-based resources for patients and families.
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.