ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2025
Ethical Considerations for the Use of Social Media in the Human Subjects Research Setting.
Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Unlabelled: The integration of social media into human subjects research offers significant opportunities for data collection, disease surveillance, and participant recruitment. However, it also poses a number of ethical challenges. This article evaluates the dual nature of social media as a research tool, highlighting its potential benefits while also addressing concerns about exacerbating health disparities, compromising participant privacy and confidentiality, challenging expectations around participant disclosure, and perpetuating discriminatory practices. By exploring issues related to equity and privacy, this article discusses the implications of digital recruitment and online behavioral advertising, underscoring the vital role of institutional review boards in ensuring ethical standards are upheld. Furthermore, this work proposes key strategies for researchers and regulatory authorities, emphasizing community engagement, transparency, and inclusive recruitment practices. The analysis aims to guide stakeholders in navigating the ethical complexities of digital research, fostering transparency, trust, and accountability in the realm of human subjects research.
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.