Tanning Misinformation Posted by Businesses on Social Media and Related Perceptions of Adolescent and Young Adult White Non-Hispanic Women: Mixed Methods Study
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Indoor ultraviolet (UV) tanning is common and consequential, increasing the risk for cancers including melanoma and basal cell carcinoma. At-risk groups include adolescents and young adults, who often report beliefs about benefits of tanning. Adolescent and young adults are also among the most ubiquitous social media users. As previous studies support that content about tanning is common on social media, this may be a way that young women are exposed to influential content promoting tanning, including health misinformation. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate health misinformation promoted by indoor tanning businesses via social media and to understand young women's perceptions of this misinformation. METHODS: This mixed methods study included (1) retrospective observational content analysis of indoor tanning salons' content on Facebook over 1 year and (2) qualitative interviews with a purposeful national sample of 46 White non-Hispanic women, age 16 to 23 years, who had recently tanned indoors. We assessed experiences with tanning businesses' posted content on social media through interviews. We used the constant comparative approach for qualitative analyses. RESULTS: Content analysis findings included data from indoor tanning businesses (n=147) across 50 states, yielding 4956 total posts. Among 9 health misinformation topics identified, the most common was the promotion of UV tanning as a safe way to get Vitamin D (n=73, 1.5%). An example post was "Stop by Body and Sol to get your daily dose of Vitamin D." Another misinformation topic was promoting tanning for health benefits (n=31, 0.62%), an example post was "the flu is not a season, it's an inability to adapt due to decreased sun exposure…" A total of 46 participants completed interviews (age: mean 20 years, SD 2). Almost all participants (45/46, 98%) used Facebook, and 43.5% (20/46) followed an indoor tanning business on social media. Approximately half of participants reported seeing social media posts from tanning salons about Vitamin D, an example of a participant comment was "I have [seen that] a few times..." Among the participants, approximately half believed it was safe to get Vitamin D from indoor UV tanning; a participant stated: "I think it is a valid benefit to UV tanning." CONCLUSIONS: Despite the low frequency (range 0.5%-1.5%) of social media posts promoting health misinformation, participants commonly reported viewing these posts, and their perceptions aligned with health misinformation. Health education campaigns, possibly using social media to target at-risk populations, may be an innovative approach for tanning prevention messages.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».