MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4319310068 · doi:10.2196/41969

Compliance With the US Food and Drug Administration’s Guidelines for Health Warning Labels and Engagement in Little Cigar and Cigarillo Content: Computer Vision Analysis of Instagram Posts

2023· article· en· W4319310068 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jiaxi Wu, Juan Manuel Origgi, Lynsie R Ranker, Aruni Bhatnagar, Rose Marie Robertson, Ziming Xuan, Derry Wijaya, Traci Hong, Jessica L. Fetterman

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Infodemiology · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSmoking Behavior and Cessation
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Heart, Lung, and Blood InstituteNational Institutes of HealthAmerican Heart Association
KeywordsInfluencer marketingAdvertisingFood and drug administrationHealth riskSocial mediaMedicineBusinessEnvironmental healthPsychologyMarketingComputer scienceWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background Health warnings in tobacco advertisements provide health information while also increasing the perceived risks of tobacco use. However, existing federal laws requiring warnings on advertisements for tobacco products do not specify whether the rules apply to social media promotions. Objective This study aims to examine the current state of influencer promotions of little cigars and cigarillos (LCCs) on Instagram and the use of health warnings in influencer promotions. Methods Instagram influencers were identified as those who were tagged by any of the 3 leading LCC brand Instagram pages between 2018 and 2021. Posts from identified influencers, which mentioned one of the three brands were considered LCC influencer promotions. A novel Warning Label Multi-Layer Image Identification computer vision algorithm was developed to measure the presence and properties of health warnings in a sample of 889 influencer posts. Negative binomial regressions were performed to examine the associations of health warning properties with post engagement (number of likes and comments). Results The Warning Label Multi-Layer Image Identification algorithm was 99.3% accurate in detecting the presence of health warnings. Only 8.2% (n=73) of LCC influencer posts included a health warning. Influencer posts that contained health warnings received fewer likes (incidence rate ratio 0.59, P<.001, 95% CI 0.48-0.71) and fewer comments (incidence rate ratio 0.46, P<.001, 95% CI 0.31-0.67). Conclusions Health warnings are rarely used by influencers tagged by LCC brands’ Instagram accounts. Very few influencer posts met the US Food and Drug Administration’s health warning requirement of size and placement for tobacco advertising. The presence of a health warning was associated with lower social media engagement. Our study provides support for the implementation of comparable health warning requirements to social media tobacco promotions. Using an innovative computer vision approach to detect health warning labels in influencer promotions on social media is a novel strategy for monitoring health warning compliance in social media tobacco promotions.

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 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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.240

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.173
GPT teacher head0.436
Teacher spread0.263 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations6
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR InfodemiologySame topicSmoking Behavior and CessationFrench-language works237,207