ArticleWomen's health (London, England)
Exploring the quality and credibility of nutritional advice for menstrual health on instagram.
Article in Women's health (London, England). The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Beyond the hashtag: a content analysis of #womenshealth posts on Instagram.Health promotion international · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BackgroundSocial media is a widely used source of health information, yet the quality and accuracy of shared content can vary. Menstrual and hormonal health are especially prone to misinformation, given their complexity, individual variability, and the limited strength and consistency of available research evidence. This study explored Instagram content related to nutrition and menstrual health, identifying commonly recurring themes and assessing the quality and credibility of the information by comparing claims with current evidence and examining account holder credentials.ObjectivesTo identify predominant content themes and evaluate the quality and credibility of nutrition-related menstrual health information on Instagram.DesignQualitative study using inductive content analysis.MethodsInstagram accounts posting nutrition content about hormonal and menstrual health were identified through a structured search conducted on 29/01/25, with the ten most recent posts per account analysed. Inductive content analysis was used to code 52 posts from eligible accounts into emerging themes using NVivo software.ResultsOf 50 Instagram accounts identified, 21 met inclusion criteria. Four main themes were identified: Marketing and Engagement Strategies; Nutrition and Dietary Recommendations; Hormonal and Physiological Claims; and Symptoms, Wellbeing and Lifestyle Factors. Across these themes, many posts included claims that were not fully supported by current scientific evidence or lacked important context and nuance, particularly those relating to hormonal regulation, cycle-based nutrition advice and supplementation.ConclusionFindings from this study suggest that nutrition-related Instagram content on menstrual health frequently includes claims that are not fully aligned with current evidence or are presented without sufficient context or nuance. These findings highlight the importance of critically evaluating online health information and the need for clearer, evidence-based guidance in this area.
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.