ArticleCancer causes & control : CCC2025
Social media use and the relationship with colorectal cancer screening among foreign-born populations in the United States.
Article in Cancer causes & control : CCC, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- What Patients With Asthma Share When No One Listens: Multimethod Observational Study of Patient Narratives on Reddit.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Observational
- Correlates of patient-centered discussions on colorectal cancer screening: results from the health information national trends survey (HINTS).Cancer causes & control : CCC · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSocial media (SM) has emerged as a tool for health-related usage among US adults, including cancer screening promotion. Here, we aimed to assess the differences in health-related SM use between US and foreign-born adults and the relationship between health-related SM use and colorectal (CRC) screening practices.
methodsUsing data from the fifth edition of the National Cancer Institute's Health Information National Trends Survey (HINTS 5), cycle 2, we compared the differences in health-related SM use between US and foreign-born adults and the effects of SM use on CRC screening by country of birth. We included adults aged 50-75 and excluded participants with a history of CRC. The primary endpoint was CRC screening, which was determined by self-reported CRC screening using colonoscopy, sigmoidoscopy, or stool occult blood testing.
resultsOur study included 1,812 adults, of whom 236 (13.0%) were foreign-born. Most participants (72.1%) reported undergoing CRC screening. Interestingly, we found no discernible difference in health-related SM use [odds ratio [OR] 0.91; 95% CI (0.49, 1.69)] between US and foreign-born adults. Furthermore, our analysis revealed that SM use did not influence CRC screening practices among either group (US-born: 0.88 [95% CI: 0.50, 1.52], foreign-born 0.52 [0.10, 2.51]).
conclusionContrary to previous studies, which showed a positive relationship between SM use and satisfactory health-related practices, we found that although foreign-born adults use SM as much as US-born adults, there was no significant relationship between SM use and CRC screening.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40100525What 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.