Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38032377›Full record

ArticleInternational urogynecology journal2024

Perineal lacerations and social media: can patients find reliable information on Instagram and TikTok?

Emily Passarelli, Moiuri Siddique, Laura Fry, Lisa Hickman, Katie Propst

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in International urogynecology journal, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07223736 (Postpartum Education Via Artificial Intelligence for Recovery and Loneliness), which is not on this map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–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.

NCT07223736 narecruitingnot on this mapstarted 2026, after this paper: background citation

Postpartum Education Via Artificial Intelligence for Recovery and Loneliness (PEARL): A Randomized Controlled Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of California, San DiegoRan2026 to 2026Enrolled130ConditionsPelvic Floor Disorder, Loneliness, Postpartum, Mental HealthArmsGenerative artificial intelligence (genAI) postpartum chatbot, Standard of Care (SOC)
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

5 authors.

Emily PassarelliObstetrics and Gynecology, Westchester Medical Center, Valhalla, NY, USA.
Moiuri SiddiqueDivision of Female Pelvic Medicine and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, NYU Langone Health, New York, NY, USA. Moiuri.siddique@nyulangone.org.
Laura FryCreator of Life After 4th Degree Tears Online Community, New York, NY, USA.
Lisa HickmanDivision of Female Pelvic Medicine and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Obstetrics & Gynecology, Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, OH, 43221, USA.
Katie PropstDivision of Urogynecology & Reconstructive Pelvic Surgery, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Morsani College of Medicine at the University of South Florida, Tampa, FL, 33602, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introduction and hypothesisSocial media content related to patient experiences and education continues to grow. Information on how obstetric perineal lacerations are represented on social media is limited. Our goal is to characterize available social media content on obstetric perineal lacerations.

methodsThis is an IRB-exempt study using publicly available data on commonly searched topics about perineal lacerations to create a list of queries for Instagram and TikTok. The ten queries and "keyword" searches with the highest number of posts were identified from this list. The 50 most recent posts were reviewed for relevance, quality of content, and authorship. Topic-relevant posts were analyzed.

resultsThe search yielded 427 posts on Instagram and 500 on TikTok. Instagram yielded more topic-relevant posts than TikTok (94.1% vs 44.8%). Almost 50% of posts were categorized as educational. Instagram identified more patient experience-related posts (29.6%) whereas TikTok provided more humorous content (26.3%). Patients produced 27.6% of content on Instagram and 43.3% on TikTok. Physical therapists produced 18.9% of posts on Instagram and 21.9% on TikTok. They constituted the largest group of health professionals to post overall. Physician-created educational content accounted for 10.3% of posts on Instagram and 6.0% on TikTok.

conclusionsCompared with TikTok, Instagram may be a more informative social media platform for educational or patient experience-related content. Given the paucity of physician-created content and given that only half of all posts are educational, providers should encourage social media engagement for community and networking purposes, while encouraging caution with regard to cosmetic products and advertisements.

Indexed as

LacerationsSocial MediaAuthorshipEducational StatusFemaleHealth PersonnelHumansPregnancyHealth care professionalObstetric perineal lacerationSocial media

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

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.