MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4415030758 · doi:10.2196/78774

Feasibility of the Social Media–Based Prevention Program “Leduin” for German Adolescents on Instagram: Mixed Methods Pilot Study

2025· article· en· W4415030758 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Elizabeth Zimmermann, Samuel Tomczyk

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Formative Research · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Media in Health Education
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychological interventionGermanProgram evaluationDigital healthSocial mediaContent analysisMEDLINE

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Digital platforms, particularly social media, including Instagram, present unique opportunities for health promotion among adolescents due to their widespread use with interactive features supporting high user engagement. However, the feasibility of effectively utilizing platforms like Instagram for health interventions requires careful consideration of adolescent engagement patterns. Objective: This pilot study evaluated the leduin program-designed to foster essential life skills and functional social media use among adolescents-while also exploring the broader feasibility of using Instagram to deliver complex social and psychological interventions in this population. Methods: The study adapted the feasibility framework by Bowen et al and used a mixed methods approach. Quantitatively, Instagram interaction metrics of 99 participants (women: 62/99, 63%; men: 37/99, 37%; aged 14-18 years; mean age 15.2, SD 0.74 years) were analyzed descriptively (means, medians, SDs) and inferentially (Welch ANOVA, Kruskal-Wallis, Pearson and Spearman correlations, linear and segmented regression analyses) using RStudio. Metrics included story views, retention rates, feature engagement (eg, polls, question stickers, quizzes), and drop-off rates. Recruitment efforts were also analyzed descriptively. Qualitatively, 13 postprogram semistructured interviews were conducted with 11 women (11/13, 65%) and 6 men (6/13, 35%; mean age 15.29, SD 0.99 years). Participants were sampled to reflect varying engagement levels (6 high, 5 medium, 6 low). The mean interview duration was 25 minutes 11 seconds (SD 6 minutes 34 seconds). Content analysis, with high intercoder reliability (κ=0.90), comprehensively explored participants' experiences and the program's impact. Results: Quantitative results indicated that the recruitment process was challenging, with 101 schools and 10 youth centers contacted, resulting in a participation rate of 12.8% (99/775 students). On Instagram, story views ranged from 34 to 81 per post, with an average daily retention rate of 87.7% (SD 7.8%). By week 4, 76% of the total drop in views had occurred (mean views declined from 66.1 to 53.4); by week 6, 97.3% of the drop had been reached (declined from 66.1 to 49.9 views), indicating sustained viewer interest over the 14-week program. Features requiring minimal user effort, including polls (mean 56.8%-54.4%), quizzes (mean 56.6%), and sliders (mean 51.2%), showed significantly higher interaction rates than more demanding features such as challenges (mean 21.7%) and question stickers (mean 20.6%; P<.001). Qualitative findings revealed that adolescents valued the program, its design and methods for its relevance to their daily lives, and its support in developing essential life skills. Suggestions for improvements were made. Conclusions: The study underlines the potential of various Instagram features and content posting schedules for health interventions to meet adolescent preferences and interests. Challenges with reaching the target group effectively emphasize the need for targeted recruitment strategies and optimizing initial content to boost engagement, underscoring the critical implications for prevention research and policy in leveraging digital platforms to enhance adolescent health.

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)0.014
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: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.074

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0140.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.461
GPT teacher head0.671
Teacher spread0.209 · 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 designNon-randomized trial
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Formative Research→Same topicSocial Media in Health Education→French-language works237,207→