ArticleContraception and reproductive medicine2024
Contraceptive content shared on social media: an analysis of Twitter.
Article in Contraception and reproductive medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.
- Assessing the believability of contraceptive misinformation among young Latinas (CREO): protocol for a discrete choice experiment.BMJ open · 2026Article
- Development of a User-Informed Decision Aid for Contraceptive Decision-Making Among Adolescents and Young Adults: Qualitative Study.JMIR formative research · 2026Article
- Qualitative exploration of using hormonal contraception on mental health and wellbeing: Diverse experiences and a call for more support.BMC women's health · 2026Article
- Contraception-Related Posts from Adolescents, Young Adults, and Caregivers on Reddit: A Qualitative Content Analysis.Journal of pediatric and adolescent gynecology · 2026Article
- Viral but Not Verified: Analyzing Accuracy and Engagement in TikTok Discussions of IUDs.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Examining contraception-related discourse on social media after the Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization Supreme Court decision: a textual analysis of user-generated content on X (formerly Twitter).Reproductive health · 2026Article
- Multiplatform characterization of online permanent female contraception discussion among social media users: analysis of Twitter and Reddit.Reproductive health · 2025Article
- "Do You Know What Birth Control Actually Does to Your Body?": Assessing Contraceptive Information on TikTok.Perspectives on sexual and reproductive health · 2025Article
- Article
- Hormonal Therapies for Acne: A Comprehensive Update for Dermatologists.Dermatology and therapy · 2025Review
- Side effects and cessation of the oral contraceptive pill on TikTok: a content analysis.Frontiers in reproductive health · 2025Article
- Role of Social Media Applications in Improving Sexual Health Awareness and Reducing the Incidence of Sexually Transmitted Diseases among Adults.Journal of mid-life healthArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundInformation on social media may affect peoples' contraceptive decision making. We performed an exploratory analysis of contraceptive content on Twitter (recently renamed X), a popular social media platform.
methodsWe selected a random subset of 1% of publicly available, English-language tweets related to reversible, prescription contraceptive methods posted between January 2014 and December 2019. We oversampled tweets for the contraceptive patch to ensure at least 200 tweets per method. To create the codebook, we identified common themes specific to tweet content topics, tweet sources, and tweets soliciting information or providing advice. All posts were coded by two team members, and differences were adjudicated by a third reviewer. Descriptive analyses were reported with accompanying qualitative findings.
resultsDuring the study period, 457,369 tweets about reversible contraceptive methods were published, with a random sample of 4,434 tweets used for final analysis. Tweets most frequently discussed contraceptive method decision-making (26.7%) and side effects (20.5%), particularly for long-acting reversible contraceptive methods and the depot medroxyprogesterone acetate shot. Tweets about logistics of use or adherence were common for short-acting reversible contraceptives. Tweets were frequently posted by contraceptive consumers (50.6%). A small proportion of tweets explicitly requested information (6.2%) or provided advice (4.2%).
conclusionsClinicians should be aware that individuals are exposed to information through Twitter that may affect contraceptive perceptions and decision making, particularly regarding long-acting reversible contraceptives. Social media is a valuable source for studying contraceptive beliefs missing in traditional health research and may be used by professionals to disseminate accurate contraceptive information.
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.