Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37163319›Full record

SynthesisJournal of medical Internet research2023

Conceptualizing and Measuring Social Media Use in Health and Well-being Studies: Systematic Review.

Mesfin Awoke Bekalu, Taisuke Sato, K Viswanath

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of medical Internet research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Ten Myths About the Effect of Social Media Use on Well-Being.Journal of medical Internet research · 2024
    Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. The Role of Social Media as a Resource for Mental Health Care.European journal of investigation in health, psychology and education · 2023
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Mesfin Awoke BekaluLee Kum Sheung Center for Health and Happiness, Harvard TH Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA, United States.ORCID 0000-0003-1243-5813
Taisuke SatoTufts University, Medford, MA, United States.ORCID 0000-0001-6830-2812
K ViswanathLee Kum Sheung Center for Health and Happiness, Harvard TH Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-4795-5803

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDespite an increasing number of studies revealing both the benefits and harms of social media use on well-being, there is heterogeneity and a lack of consensus on how social media use is conceptualized, defined, and measured. Additionally, little is known whether existing literature focuses on ill-being or well-being outcomes and whether studies use theories.

objectiveThe main objective of this review was to examine (1) how social media use has been conceptualized and measured, (2) what health and well-being outcomes have been focused on, and (3) whether studies used theories.

methodsStudies were located through a comprehensive search strategy involving 4 steps. First, keyword searches were conducted on 6 major databases: PubMed, Web of Science, PsycINFO, Embase, ProQuest, and Annual Reviews. Second, a search was conducted on Google Scholar using the same sets of search terms, and the first 100 results were examined. Third, the reference sections of reviews identified in the first 2 rounds of searches were examined, and finally, the reference lists of the final set of papers included in the review were searched. Through a multistage screening, papers that met our inclusion criteria were analyzed.

resultsThe review included a total of 233 papers published between 2007 and 2020 in 51 different countries. While 66 (28%) of the studies investigated the effects of the problematic use or addiction of social media on health and well-being, 167 (72%) studied the effects of social media use as a "normal" behavior. Most of the studies used measures assessing the time users spend using social media. Most of the studies that examined the effects of problematic social media use or addiction used addiction scales. Most studies examined the association of social media use with mental illnesses such as depression, anxiety, self-esteem, and loneliness. While there are a considerable number of studies investigating physical health outcomes such as self-rated health, sleep, and sitting time or lack of physical activity, relatively a small number of studies examined social, psychological, and emotional well-being. Most of the studies 183 (79%) did not use any theory.

conclusionsMost studies conceptualized social media use as a "normal" behavior and mostly used time-spent measures, whereas a considerable number of studies conceptualized social media use as an addiction and used various addiction measures. The studies disproportionately focused on investigating the associations of social media use with negative health and well-being outcomes. The findings suggest the need for going beyond time spent to more sophisticated measurement approaches that consider the multiplicity of activities that users perform on social media platforms and the need for more theory-based studies on the association of social media use with not only negative well-being or "ill-being" but also with positive health and well-being outcomes.

Indexed as

Behavior, AddictiveMental DisordersSocial MediaAnxietyHumansLonelinessaddictcomputer useconceptualizationhealthmeasurementscreen timesocial mediatechnology useusagewell-being

Identifiers

PMID37163319
PMCPMC10209793

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.