MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4205166610 · doi:10.2196/31533

Use of Social Networks in the Context of the Dietitian’s Practice in Brazil and Changes During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Exploratory Study

2022· article· en· W4205166610 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jackson Sbardelotto, Bárbara Birck Martins, Caroline Buss

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Formative Research · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Media in Health Education
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPandemicSocial network (sociolinguistics)Context (archaeology)Exploratory researchSocial mediaMedicineCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)PerceptionMedical educationPublic relationsPsychologyNursingSociologyPolitical scienceSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Social networks have been pointed out as 1 of the greatest means of spreading information. A large part of the population is already present on these platforms, looking up subjects such as health, nutrition, and food. To reach this audience, it may be important for dietitians to explore social networks. However, there is a gap in scientific studies on exploring the ways in which these platforms are used by dietitians in Brazil, and the roles they play in the profession have not been well defined. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to describe the roles that social networks play in dietitians' practice in Brazil and their mode of use of social networks. This study also aims to identify professionals' perceptions and opinions regarding the use of these tools, as well as changes in behavior on social network usage caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: We carried out a quantitative cross-sectional study, collecting data through an online questionnaire, submitted between October 2020 and January 2021 to dietitians registered on the Federal Council of Dietitians. All participants included in the study answered questions about the use of social networks in their professional context. RESULTS: In total, 264 (91.7%) of the 288 participants reported using social networks for professional practice. Instagram was the social network most often used by professionals (224/264, 84.8%). Dietitians (N=288) related to the use of social networks (always to almost always) for sharing information about their services (n=114-72 [39.6%-25%], respectively), following the work of other dietitians (n=172-64 [59.7%-22.2%], respectively), and writing about topics related to food and nutrition (n=166-53 [57.6%-18.4%], respectively). The roles played by social networks in the professional context of dietitians were attracting more clients (210/289, 72.7%) and keeping in touch with them (195/289, 67.5%). Furthermore, 227 (78.5%) of the 289 dietitians strongly agreed that social networks are good tools to promote their services. During the COVID-19 pandemic, 216 (74.7%) of the 289 participants noticed changes in their behavior, feelings, or beliefs on the use of social networks related to professional practice, and 149 (51.6%) have increased the frequency of sharing information about nutrition and health in general on social networks. CONCLUSIONS: The main roles of social networks in the professional context of dietitians are to attract clients and to facilitate the contact between professional and client. The modes of use reported by the professionals included sharing information about their services, following the work of professional colleagues, and writing about topics related to nutrition. Most of them reported believing that social networks are an effective way to disseminate their services. Moreover, most professionals claimed to have noticed changes in their behaviors or beliefs on social media during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.048

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.375
GPT teacher head0.547
Teacher spread0.172 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations10
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Formative ResearchSame topicSocial Media in Health EducationFrench-language works237,207