MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4285332497 · doi:10.2196/34940

Skin Cancer Narratives on Instagram: Content Analysis

2022· article· en· W4285332497 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Infodemiology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Media in Health Education
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSkin cancerPopularitySocial mediaCancerPopulationNarrativeMedicineModalitiesCancer preventionInternet privacyPsychologyEnvironmental healthComputer scienceWorld Wide WebSociologySocial psychologySocial scienceInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Skin cancer is among the deadliest forms of cancer in the United States. The American Cancer Society reported that 3 million skin cancer cases could be avoided every year if individuals are more aware of the risk factors related to sun exposure and prevention. Social media platforms may serve as potential intervention modalities that can be used to raise public awareness of several diseases and health conditions, including skin cancer. Social media platforms are efficient, cost-effective tools for health-related content that can reach a broad number of individuals who are already using these spaces in their day-to-day personal lives. Instagram was launched in 2010, and it is now used by 1 billion users, of which 90% are under the age of 35 years. Despite previous research highlighting the potential of image-based platforms in skin cancer prevention and leveraging Instagram's popularity among the priority population to raise awareness, there is still a lack of studies describing skin cancer-related content on Instagram. Objective: This study aims to describe skin cancer-related content on Instagram, including the type of account; the characteristics of the content, such as the kind of media used; and the type of skin cancer discussed. This study also seeks to reveal content themes in terms of skin cancer risks, treatment, and prevention. Methods: skin cancer, (2) written in English language only, and (3) originated from the United States. Guided by previous research and through an iterative process, 2 undergraduate students independently coded the remaining posts. The 2 coders and a moderator met several times to refine the codebook. Results: Of the 592 posts, profiles representing organizations (n=321, 54.2%) were slightly more common than individual accounts (n=256, 43.2%). The type of media included in the posts varied, with posts containing photos occurring more frequently (n=315, 53.2%) than posts containing infographics (n=233, 39.4%) or videos (n=85, 14.4%). Melanoma was the most mentioned type of skin cancer (n=252, 42.6%). Prevention methods (n=404, 68.2%) were discussed in Instagram posts more often than risk factors (n=271, 45.8%). Only 81 out of 592 (13.7%) posts provided a citation. Conclusions: This study's findings highlight the potential role of Instagram as a platform for improving awareness of skin cancer risks and the benefits of prevention practices. We believe that social media is the most promising venue for researchers and dermatologists to dedicate their efforts and presence that can widely reach the public to educate about skin cancer and empower prevention.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.344
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.307
GPT teacher head0.503
Teacher spread0.196 · 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