This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work, first published in the Journal of Medical Internet Research, is properly cited. The complete bibliographic information, a link to the original publication on http://www.jmir.org/, as well as this copyright and license information must be included.
Background
Social media platforms are increasingly used by registered dietitians (RDs) to improve knowledge translation and exchange in nutrition. However, a thorough understanding of social media in dietetic practice is lacking.
Objective
The objective of this study was to map and summarize the evidence about the users, uses, and effects of social media in dietetic practice to identify gaps in the literature and inform future research by using a scoping review methodology.
Methods
Stages for conducting the scoping review included the following: (1) identifying the research question; (2) identifying relevant studies through a comprehensive multidatabase and gray literature search strategy; (3) selecting eligible studies; (4) charting the data; and (5) collating, summarizing, and reporting results for dissemination. Finally, knowledge users (RDs working for dietetic professional associations and public health organizations) were involved in each review stage to generate practical findings.
Results
Of the 47 included studies, 34 were intervention studies, 4 were descriptive studies, 2 were content analysis studies, and 7 were expert opinion papers in dietetic practice. Discussion forums were the most frequent social media platform evaluated (n=19), followed by blogs (n=13) and social networking sites (n=10). Most studies targeted overweight and obese or healthy users, with adult populations being most studied. Social media platforms were used to deliver content as part of larger multiple component interventions for weight management. Among intervention studies using a control group with no exposition to social media, we identified positive, neutral, and mixed effects of social media for outcomes related to users’ health behaviors and status (eg, dietary intakes and body weight), participation rates, and professional knowledge. Factors associated with the characteristics of the specific social media, such as ease of use, a design for quick access to desired information, and concurrent reminders of use, were perceived as the main facilitators to the use of social media in dietetic practice, followed to a lesser extent by interactions with an RD and social support from fellow users. Barriers to social media use were mostly related to complicated access to the site and time issues.
Conclusions
Research on social media in dietetic practice is at its infancy, but it is growing fast. So far, this field of research has targeted few social media platforms, most of which were assessed in multiple-component interventions for weight management among overweight or obese adults. Trials isolating the effects and mechanisms of action of specific social media platforms are needed to draw conclusions regarding the effectiveness of those tools to support dietetic practice. Future studies should address barriers and facilitators related to the use of social media written by RDs and should explore how to make these tools useful for RDs to reach health consumers to improve health through diet.
social mediadietreviewIntroduction
With the increasing worldwide prevalence of obesity [1] and its related comorbidities [2,3], effective and low-cost approaches that can improve health behaviors, such as those related to diet, are needed to improve health and well-being in populations. The advent of Web 2.0 [4] has triggered a revolution in the way patients access health information for their health management [5,6] and provide opportunities for population-wide promotion of healthy behaviors. Social media is a broad example of Web 2.0 and refers to Internet-based platforms devoted to blogging, social networking, collaborative writing projects, content communities, and virtual social worlds [7].
Social media platforms are novel avenues with high reach potential of dissemination that can be used by health care professionals to improve knowledge translation of evidence-based health information to health consumers and patients. The growing use of social media by patients and health professionals has been widely advocated in the scientific literature [8-10]. A survey of 195 registered dietitians (RDs) and dietetic students conducted by the Dietitian Connection network in Australia found that almost all (97%) of RDs use social media, Facebook being the platform of predilection followed by Instagram, illustrating that visual imagery has significantly gained in popularity among RDs for showcasing food and recipes [11]. Furthermore, social media represents valuable additions to traditional face-to-face clinical encounters to deliver behavioral interventions [12] notably to support long-term and sustained dietary behavior change efforts for chronic disease management and prevention [13].
Social media can be used for numerous purposes in dietetic practice, including public health. Social media has been used to broaden the scope of nutrition education program by using different social media platforms (Facebook, Twitter, and Pinterest) to disseminate actionable messages [14,15]. Social media also provides a promising way to deliver dietary behavior change interventions [16-18].
Dietetic professional associations have recognized the role of social media RDs’ professional practice [19] and feature a repertoire of their members who are active on social media such as Twitter [20] and blogs [21,22]. However, much remains unknown in the scientific literature about social media in dietetic practice and whether they can help health consumers make informed decisions to improve health through diet.
To fill this gap in knowledge, we aimed to answer the following research question: What evidence is provided about the users, uses, and effects of social media in dietetic practice? The specific research questions were as follows:
Who is using social media in dietetic practice?
What are the purposes of social media in dietetic practice?
What are the effects of interventions using social media in dietetic practice on food- and nutrition-related outcomes?
What are the barriers and facilitators that could influence the use of social media in dietetic practice?
What are the research gaps in this literature to inform future research?
MethodsKnowledge Synthesis Methodology
Our research objectives were addressed using the scoping review methodology, which is a type of knowledge synthesis that aims to map rapidly the key concepts underpinning a research area and the main sources and types of evidence available [23]. We formulated our protocol [24] using the methodology proposed by Arksey and O’Malley [23] and taking into account recommendations by Levac et al [25]. All steps were iterative to ensure full understanding of the content and extent of the literature. A summary of our 6-stage methodology follows.
Stage 1: Identifying the Research Question
Studies were included if they reported primary questions focused on the users, uses, or effects of social media on food- and nutrition-related outcomes. On the basis of Kaplan and Heanleins’s classification scheme [7], we defined social media as “a group of Internet-based applications that build on the ideological and technological foundations of Web 2.0, and that allow the creation and exchange of user-generated content,” including the following platforms: collaborative projects (eg, wikis), blogs and microblogs (eg, Twitter), content communities (eg, Pinterest), social networking sites (eg, Facebook), and virtual social worlds (eg, Second Life; Linden Lab, San Francisco, California). Discussion forums were also included as they incorporate content that is publicly available and created by end users, and were judged to fall within the social media spectrum. We defined social media in dietetic practice as any social media platforms written by RDs for nutrition- and food-related purposes. Involvement of RDs with social media (eg, writing blog postings on positive messages to promote dietary behavior change or moderating a Facebook-based peer support group in a weight loss intervention) had to be specified in the study methods, or this information had to be obtained upon correspondence the authors. Studies were eligible regardless of their experimental design, users, and the degree of involvement of RDs with social media. We excluded studies in which the social media platform was not clearly described, studies on other eHealth technologies (eg, mobile apps), editorials, and publications not written in English or French.
Stage 2: Identifying Studies and the Gray Literature
With the collaboration of a medical information specialist, we developed a search strategy to identify all relevant sources of information on social media in dietetic practice. Using specific keywords related to social media, Web 2.0, and nutrition, we conducted a systematic search, using November 15, 2016, as a cutoff date, in the following scientific databases: MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, the Cochrane Library, Web of Science, ABI/INFORM Global, and ProQuest Dissertations & Theses. All databases were searched with a publication date range limit of 2000 or later, corresponding to the advent of social software and Web 2.0 applications [26]. The Medline search strategy is presented in Multimedia Appendix 1. This search strategy was thereafter modified to account for specificities of the other scientific databases.
We conducted additional searches by scanning the reference lists of included studies, exploring the literature with the search engine “Google scholar,” and searching for gray literature using the most widely used Internet search engines “Google,” “Bing,” and “Yahoo.” For each of these search engines, we used a more specific search string query. As performed by Archambault et al [27], we analyzed the first 100 results of each search engine, which displayed results by relative importance of website pages using a link analysis algorithm [28].
Stage 3: Selecting Studies and the Gray Literature
Two review authors (AL and A-AD) independently assessed the eligibility of publications identified by the search strategies using titles and abstracts. Then, the same 2 reviewers retrieved full-text copies of publications that were judged potentially relevant to the review to validate inclusion. Disagreements were resolved through discussion and with a third review author (SD) when consensus was not reached. Authors were contacted to obtain further details when papers contained insufficient information to make a decision about eligibility.
Stage 4: Charting the Data
A data-charting template was developed to extract the following common features from all studies: authors’ names, year of publication, title, journal, status of publication (eg, published, in press, or gray literature), country, experimental design, aim of the study, number of users, sociodemographic characteristics of users, type of social media studied, uses of social media, nutrition- and food-related outcomes studied, description of the effects of social media on outcomes studied, and description of barriers and facilitators that could affect the use of social media. The template was a priori tested with 10 included studies to validate extensiveness and clarity among the reviewers. The review authors independently extracted the data from all included studies and resolved any discrepancies in judgment by discussion and consensus, or with the third review author (SD) when necessary.
Stage 5: Collating, Summarizing, and Reporting Results
As suggested by Levac et al [25], our analysis involved textual descriptions and data tables to map and summarize extracted data. To structure the presentation of results, we classified studies according to their research objectives: intervention studies (eg, studies investigating the effects of social media), descriptive studies (eg, studies describing who uses social media and for what purposes), content analysis studies (eg, studies in which information of social media content is analyzed), or expert opinion papers (eg, studies discussing ethical and professional use of social media by RDs).
A descriptive numerical summary of the study characteristics extracted was then conducted. Our classification for purposes of social media use was inspired by Coulter and Ellins’s classification scheme for patient-oriented interventions [29,30] with the addition of relevant dietetic, professional [31], and interactive technology [32] outcomes. Studies globally assessed multiple food- and nutrition-related outcomes and/or evaluated those outcomes at different times (eg, 16 weeks, 6 months, 12 months). Consequently, we retrieved all effects of social media on food- and nutrition-related outcomes as they were reported by authors in studies where intervention groups exposed to single or multiple social media platforms were compared with a control group with no social media access.
Finally, we performed a qualitative thematic analysis to identify potential barriers and facilitators related to the use of social media by users. The qualitative analysis was performed with the NVivo software, version 10 (QSR International, Cambridge, MA, 2012), and consisted of interpreting textual data subjectively by classifying and coding the information into categories that best reflected outputs we had identified [33]. The description of barriers and facilitators was guided by the validated taxonomy developed by Gagnon et al [31]. The review authors independently read each study and identified sentences or paragraphs in the text relevant to these categories and aggregated them into main themes to facilitate the synthesis. The review authors resolved any coding discrepancies through discussion and consensus.
Stage 6: Consulting Knowledge Users
At each critical stage of the review process, we either held a teleconference meeting or exchanged emails with two RD representatives working, respectively, in public health nutrition and in a national dietetic professional association to explain our methodology and progression of our work and to gather their feedback and generate relevant results for dietetic practice.
ResultsDescription of Included Studies
After excluding duplicates, we identified 23,609 potentially relevant publications from electronic databases and gray literature searches. From these, we excluded 22,815 publications after examining the titles and abstracts, and we retrieved 756 full texts of potentially relevant publications for detailed evaluation. During this screening process, we retrieved 19 additional publications from reference lists of included studies and other sources (the Journal of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics and authors’ contacts), for a total of 775 full-text publications assessed for eligibility. From these, 590 publications were excluded as at least one of our inclusion criteria was not met, and 121 publications were classified as awaiting classification due to our inability to locate full text or due to missing details despite attempts to contact study authors. A total of 64 publications (describing 47 unique studies) fulfilled our eligibility criteria and were included in this scoping review [16,18,19,34-94] (Figure 1).
Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses flow diagram for the scoping review process.
Distribution of included studies by country (N=47).
Country
Number of studies, n (%)
Studies
United States
26 (55)
[19,34,36,41,47,48,52-54,58,72-84,87,88,93]
Australia
6 (13)
[37,40,44,55,56,92]
Canada
5 (11)
[18,38,49,50,61]
Austria
2 (4)
[59,60]
Belgium
1 (2)
[43]
Germany
1 (2)
[63]
Ireland
1 (2)
[64]
Italy
1 (2)
[39]
Korea
1 (2)
[42]
United Kingdom
1 (2)
[66]
United States and Norway
1 (2)
[35]
New Zealand
1 (2)
[86]
Distribution of included publications by years of publication (n=64).
The characteristics of included studies are summarized in Multimedia Appendix 2. Studies were categorized as intervention studies (n=34; eg, quasi-experimental or randomized control trials where intervention content was delivered through one or more social media platforms), descriptive studies (n=4; eg, qualitative studies reporting the design of social media or describing perceptions and preferences of social media users), content analysis studies (n=2; eg, studies analyzing the specific content of social media), or expert opinion papers (n=7; eg, Position Papers for Ethics in Practice published in the Journal of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics). Most publications reported primary research results (42/64; 66%). Of the publications, 10 were study protocols (10/64; 16%), 3 were conference abstracts (5%), and 2 were dissertations/theses (4%). Most studies were conducted in the United States, Australia, and Canada (Table 1).
Most studies were published from 2013 onward, with the highest number of publications occurring in 2014, 2013, and 2016 (Figure 2).
Users of Social Media in Dietetic Practice
The majority of intervention studies targeted adult populations (26/34, 76%) [18,41-44,48,50,52,54-56,58-60,66,72,75,77,79, 82-84,87,88,92,93]. Among them, specific populations of users were adult women [18,50,66,84,88], young adults aged 18-35 years [55,56,72], pregnant adult women [79,92], and collegiate athletes [58]. RDs were the main users of social media in 2 intervention studies [47,78]. Remaining intervention studies targeted health care professionals (ie, those who expressed interest in enrolling in an online continuing nutrition education course [80] or professionals working in the fields of speech pathology, nursing, medical oncology, and pharmacy [40]), adolescents (2/34, 6%) [63,64], nuclear families with children aged 10-17 years (1/34, 3%) [37], and preschool-aged children and their parents (1/34, 3%) [76]. In descriptive studies, users of social media in dietetic practice were all adult populations [35,38,39,86], with some studies specifically targeting adult women [38] and RDs and patients [39]. RDs were the main users of social media in all expert opinion papers [19,34,36,53,73,74,81].
Intervention studies covered a limited range of health conditions, with most users of social media being overweight and obese (15/34, 44%) [41,44,52,54-56,59,60,72,75,82-84,88,92] or obese (3/34, 9%) [63,87,93]. In total, 8 intervention studies targeted healthy users (8/34, 24%) [18,43,50,58,66,76,79,80]. Other health conditions included patients with type 1 diabetes [64] (1/34, 3%), patients with type 2 diabetes [77] (1/34, 3%), patients with polycystic ovary syndrome (1/34, 3%) [84], and patients with metabolic syndrome (1/34, 3%) [42]. The principal health conditions of social media users were not described in 5 intervention studies [37,40,47,48,78]. Among descriptive studies, users of social media in dietetic practice were patients with type 1 or type 2 diabetes [35], healthy [38], or overweight and obese [86]. One descriptive study did not describe the health condition of social media users [39].
Uses of Social Media in Dietetic Practice
Figure 3 illustrates the frequency of social media platforms evaluated in included studies. In this figure, All social networking sites refers to social networking sites that could be used for dietetic professional networking, such as LinkedIn and Facebook, as described by Graham 2009 [53], and All social media refers to all social media platforms (ie, blogs/microblogs, discussion forms, social networking sites, collaborative projects, content communities, and virtual worlds). In Figure 3, percentages do not add up to 100 due to the possibility of multiple social media platforms per study: the SMART study [51,72] included a social networking site (Facebook) and a blog; the study described in Baghaei 2011 [37] included a study designed social networking site entitled SOcial Families, a blog, and a discussion forum; and the study described in Hales (2014) [54] and Turner-McGrievy (2014) [84] included a social networking site (Facebook) and a microblog (Twitter).
Frequency of social media tools evaluated in included studies (n=47).
Discussion forums were the most frequent social media platforms evaluated, followed by blogs and the social networking site Facebook. In the majority of intervention studies (27/34, 79%) [37,41-43,44,48,52,54,55,56,58-60,63,66,72, 75-77,79,80,83, 84,87,88,92,93], the social media platform was part of a multicomponent intervention including other modes of delivery such as emails, websites, phone calls, text messaging, or face-to-face meetings. We identified 7 single-component intervention studies. Those studies, evaluated the effects of a blog for healthy eating behavior change among adult women [18,50], a closed Facebook group for diabetes management among adolescents with type 1 diabetes [64], a discussion forum for the delivery of online journal clubs among RDs [78], the virtual world Second Life for weight management among overweight or obese adults [82] and as a training tool for RDs to perform the subjective global assessment [47], and a wiki to disseminate evidence-based practice guidelines for the nutritional management of patients with head and neck cancer [40].
The main overarching research themes of included studies are displayed in Table 2. Among intervention studies, blogs or microblogs, discussion forums, social networking sites (eg, Facebook), and virtual social worlds (eg, Second Life) were specific social media platforms used to promote healthy eating, physical activity, or lifestyle behavior change. Descriptive studies focused mostly on users’ perceptions regarding the use of blogs to improve their dietary behaviors [38] and support self-monitoring for diabetes management [35] and users’ design preferences for a weight management program that included a blog [86]. Content analysis studies provided overviews of food blogs. Ethical and professional use of social media platforms by RDs was the main use of social media discussed in all expert opinion papers.
The specific contexts of use of social media in intervention studies are displayed in Table 3. Among intervention studies, social media platforms were most commonly evaluated in the contexts of weight management and diet, such as healthy eating promotion among French-Canadian women [18,50] and collegiate athletes living in the United States [58], or the promotion of the Mediterranean diet among adult Scottish women [66].
Effects of Interventions Using Social Media in Dietetic Practice on Food- and Nutrition-Related Outcomes
Multimedia Appendix 3 presents the outcomes assessed in intervention studies using social media comparing single or multiple intervention groups with a control group with no social media access. Those studies evaluated blogs [18,55,58], discussion forums [44,48,56,66,75,78-80], a combination of Facebook and a blog [72] or a microblog (Twitter) [54], and a virtual social world (Second Life) [82]. Globally, study authors reported intervention effects on outcomes related to users’ health behaviors and status (eg, dietary intakes, body weight, and clinical indicators), compliance, participation and retention rates, and professional knowledge and self-efficacy.
Those effects were mostly neutral, but some authors reported positive or mixed effects (Multimedia Appendix 3). One study [46] reported a negative effect, with levels of eating restraint significantly higher in the intervention groups (exposed to a multicomponent behavior change intervention that included a discussion forum) compared with the control group after a 12-week Web-based weight loss intervention.
Distribution of included studies according to main uses of social media (N=47).
Main use and types of social mediaa,b
Number of studies
Studies
Intervention studies
Promoting behavior change
Blogs or microblogs
8
[18,37,50,54,55,58,72,76]
Discussion forums
15
[37,42-44,48,52,56,59,60,63,66,75,79,87,88]
Social networking sites
8
[37,41,54,64,72,84,92,93]
Virtual worlds
3
[77,82,83]
Professional dietetic education
Collaborative projects
1
[40]
Discussion forums
2
[78,80]
Virtual worlds
1
[47]
Descriptive studies
Promoting behavior change
Blogs or microblogs
3
[35,38,86]
Social networking sites
1
[39]
Content analysis studies
Overview of social media content
Blogs or microblogs
2
[49,61]
Expert opinion papers
Professional dietetic practice
All social media
4
[19,34,36,74]
All social networking sites
1
[53]
Content communities
1
[73]
Discussion forums
1
[81]
aAll social networking sites” refers to social networking sites that could be used for dietetic professional networking, such as LinkedIn and Facebook, as described by Graham 2009 [53]; “all social media” refers to all social media platforms (ie, blogs/microblogs, discussion forms, social networking sites, collaborative projects, content communities, and virtual worlds).
bThere was a possibility of multiple social media platforms per study: the Social Mobile Approaches to Reduce weighT (SMART) study. SMART study [51,72] included a social networking site (Facebook) and a blog; the study described in Baghaei 2011 [37] included a study designed social networking site entitled SOcial Families, a blog, and a discussion forum; and the study described in Hales (2014) [54] and Turner-McGrievy (2014) [84] included a social networking site (Facebook) and a microblog (Twitter).
Regarding positive effects, groups exposed to intervention content delivered through a social media platform (a blog, the virtual world Second Life, Facebook, or a discussion forum) had higher compliance [18,54], participation [18], and retention rates [18]; had significant improvements in vegetables [18] and fruit intakes [18,82]; were more satisfied with the intervention materials [66]; and had a higher increase in professional knowledge, skills, and self-efficacy in using an ecological approach to prevent childhood obesity among community-based nutrition and health professionals [80] compared with control groups with no social media exposure. In studies where interventions included a social media platform (a blog or a discussion forum) for peer support, positive effects were described for general nutrition knowledge [58], vegetables [55], fruits [82] and ultraprocessed food [55] intakes, body weight [44,55], cholesterol and blood pressure levels [44], and retention rates [44] among intervention groups compared with controls. Only one single-component study isolated and reported the specific effects of one social media. In this study [78], no statistically significant difference between a face-to-face group and a group of RDs participating in a Web-based journal club delivered through a discussion forum was found on users’ perceptions regarding the journal club environment (in terms of ability to meet the journal club objectives), the process of learning (in terms of critical appraisal skills), and the potential to apply knowledge to practice, and on users’ mean scores for the knowledge questions related to the study discussed in the journal club.
However, it was reported that RDs participating in the online journal club using a discussion forum had more positive perceptions of the journal club environment in terms of logistics for timing and opportunities for critical appraisal and of the process of learning in terms of discussion participation compared with the face-to-face control group.
Distribution of included studies according to specific contexts of use of social media in intervention studies (N=34).
Contexts of use of social media
Number of studies
Studies
Weight management
Weight loss
12
[41,44,52,54,56,59,60,72,84,87,88,93]
Weight loss and weight management
2
[82,83]
Prevention of weight gain
3
[55,63,75]
Prevention of pediatric obesity
1
[76]
Prevention of excessive gestational weight gain
2
[79,92]
Healthy diet
4
[18,50,58,66]
Continuing professional education
3
[47,78,80]
Diabetes management
2
[64,77]
Healthy lifestyle
2
[37,48]
Cancer management
1
[40]
Cardiovascular disease prevention
1
[43]
Metabolic syndrome prevention
1
[42]
In studies using multiple intervention components, social media such as blog features [37,55,58], Facebook Fan Page [41], and discussion forums [48,56] were seldom accessed or used by study participants during the course of interventions to assist behavior change. On the other hand, an interesting finding reported by Patrick et al [72] was that “...Facebook emerged as the primary modality through which dynamic content was delivered at the group level” in the Social Mobile Approaches to Reduce weighT study.
In total, 6 multiple component intervention studies reported process measures relating to social media usage. Among those, Baghaei et al [37] found that increased engagement of families in lifestyle behavior change through social networking was associated with a decrease in users' perception that health was determined by external factors, such as chance. Gold et al [52] observed that the use of the discussion board feature was negatively correlated with weight change from baseline to 6 months among some intervention participants, but no association between the use of the discussion forum and weight change was observed during weight maintenance phase (6-12 months) of the study. In the Webber et al study [88], the number of publications submitted to the discussion forum was positively associated with weight loss. Hales et al [54] and Turner-McGrievy et al [84] both observed that engagement with Facebook (assessed by the number of views, likes, comments, and participant-initiated posts) was significantly associated with weight loss at 6 months. Finally, Karpinski 2012 [58] found a weak positive correlation between the number of blog postings (type of postings not described) and dietary behavior scores, but no association with self-efficacy scores among study participants.
Barriers and Facilitators That Could Affect the Use of Social Media in Dietetic Practice by UsersFacilitators
A total of 5 studies [35,38,41,61,78] identified factors facilitating blog, discussion forum, or Facebook adoption by users (Table 4). Using Gagnon et al taxonomy [31], facilitators were mostly related to users' perceptions of the characteristics of the specific social media, such as design and technical concerns (eg, reminders of new posts via email), the characteristics of the innovation (eg, ease of use with quick access to desired information), and the validity of the resources (ie, appropriateness for the users and completeness of the information available) and, to a lesser extent, to factors associated with social media users. For example, the possibility to ask questions to the RD was a perceived facilitator for the use of healthy eating blogs written by RDs [38], and the presence of moderators’ post was cited as a facilitator to using Facebook in a weight management intervention [41]. Social support experienced with fellow social media users was an important facilitator for the use of healthy eating blogs by RDs [38], and for the participation of users in food-blogging communities, as several bloggers speaking of “the ‘comfort,’ ’encouragement,” and ‘supportive’ nature of the food-blogging community...” [61].
Barriers
A total of 6 studies [35,38,41,61,68,78] identified barriers to blog, discussion forum, or Facebook adoption by users. Globally, barriers were related to users' perceptions of the characteristics of the specific social media such as the characteristics of the innovation (eg, lack of usefulness of the social media for routine use or complicated access due to login identification) and environmental issues (eg, “the intimidation of online environment” in the context of online journal clubs [78], computer issues [38], and limited access to the Internet [41,78]). To a lesser extent, barriers were related to individual factors such as lack of time. For example, “being busy with life, going on vacation, and engaging in other family commitments” were barriers to participation in food-blogging communities [61]. Lack of time was also cited as a barrier to using Facebook, with participants mentioning they “had hectic lives and work schedules that interfered with intervention participation and behavior change” [41].
Barriers and facilitators related to the use of social media in dietetic practice.
Factors (Gagnon et al taxonomy [31])a
Number of studies in which the factor was mentioned as a facilitator
Number of studies in which the factor was mentioned as a barrier
Factors related to the specific social media
Design and technical concerns
Remindersb
3 [38,41,78]
1 [38]
Visual appearanceb
1 [38]
1 [38]
Writing styleb
1 [38]
1 [38]
Accessibilityb
1 [38]
Characteristics of the innovation
Relative advantage (usefulness)
1 [35]
Ease of use/complexity
General ease of use/complexity of the social media platformb
1 [38]
Rapid/lengthy access to the social media platformb
1 [38]
2 [66,78]
Popularity of the social media site or of the authorb
1 [38]
Legal issues
Conflict of interest, promotion of commercial productsb
1 [38]
Validity of the resources
Scientific quality of the information resources
1 [38]
Content available (completeness)
1 [38]
1 [38]
Appropriate for the users (relevance)
1 [38]
Environmental issues
General online environmentb
1 [78]
Computer issuesb
1 [38]
Access to the Internet/limited access to the Internetb
2 [41,78]
Individual factors or health care professional characteristics (knowledge and attitude)
Lack of timeb
3 [38,41,61]
Human environment
Factors associated with social media users
Social media users/registered dietitian interaction
3 [35,38,41]
Other factors associated with social media users
Identification of other social media usersb
1 [41]
Social media users should log in at the same timeb
1 [78]
Requirement to respond to other social media users’ postsb
1 [78]
Social support from other usersb
2 [38,61]
aThe following modifications were made to the Gagnon et al taxonomy [31] to fit the context of social media in dietetic practice: the term “Information and Communication Technologies (ICT)” was replaced with “social media,” the term “patients” was replaced with “social media users,” and the term “health professional” was replaced with “registered dietitian.”
bThese new factors did not exist in the Gagnon et al taxonomy [31].
DiscussionPrincipal Findings
Using a scoping review methodology, we aimed to systematically map the literature available on social media in dietetic practice and to identify knowledge gaps. We found that this literature is relatively young but that it is growing fast. Most of the research results in this field have been published from 2013 onward. We retrieved 10 study protocols; therefore, new evidence can be expected in the near future. So far, research targeting social media written by RDs for diet and food-related purposes consisted mostly of experimental (eg, randomized controlled trials) and quasi-experimental studies in the context of weight management (ie, weight loss, prevention of weight gain, and prevention of unhealthy gestational weight gain) among overweight or obese adult users.
Although we can sense a growing interest among dietetic professional associations to promote an ethical and professional use of social media by RDs to improve knowledge translation in nutrition (7 expert opinion papers were published in the Journal of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics), we were intrigued to find only 4 intervention studies targeting RDs as social media users. Those studies were conducted in limited contexts of social media use (ie, continuing professional education and knowledge translation of evidence-based practice guidelines). There is also limited evidence of RDs' perspectives regarding the barriers and facilitators to the use of social media. From the perspective of lay users, the interaction with an RD through social media was mentioned as an essential facilitator to their behavior change process. However, we have yet to understand what constitutes quality exchanges between users and RDs through social media, how much bidirectional interaction is needed between users and RDs to provide clinically significant changes in dietary behaviors and outcomes, and what are RDs’ perspectives in those communications. Globally, research aiming at identifying adoption factors of social media in dietetic practice has only focused on healthy eating blogs, discussion forums, and Facebook. More research is needed on barriers and facilitators related to the use of other social media platforms such as collaborative projects (eg, wikis), virtual social worlds, and content communities (eg, Pinterest, YouTube), and how to make these tools useful for RDs to reach patients and health consumers.
So far, research on social media in dietetic practice has globally aimed to address, with only a few exceptions, one main question: Are social media effective tools to promote dietary, physical activity, or lifestyle-related behavior change? However, more work will be needed to provide a clear answer to this question. In general, neutral effects of the use of social media in dietetic practice on outcomes such as users’ health behaviors and status (eg, dietary intakes, body weight, and clinical indicators), compliance, participation and retention rates, and professional knowledge and self-efficacy have been reported in the literature. In concordance with a scoping review of social media use among patients and caregivers [95], these findings were mostly drawn from complex interventions where social media platforms were one component among various others, such as emails, interactive websites, and face-to-face consultations, for peer and counselor support in healthy behavior change. Few types of social media platforms have been evaluated or compared. Most intervention studies evaluated discussion forums, which are the oldest forms of social media and have the lowest scores in respect to social presence and media richness, as they are text-based and hence only allow for simple exchanges [7]. We found no study conducted uniquely with social media platforms such as Instagram, which has emerged as a popular tool to share food-related pictures [96] and convey social media norms regarding healthy eating [97,98], or Twitter, which has been recognized as a useful channel for the sharing and dissemination of health information [99,100]. Therefore, although best practices for the evaluation of the effectiveness of social media remains a debated question among behavioral research scientists [101], more research is needed to draw clear conclusions regarding the effectiveness of social media in dietetic practice and their mechanisms of action to support cost-effective and clinically significant behavior change.
This scoping review highlights a number of important knowledge gaps in the literature. As common difficulties in Web-based interventions include low actual reach, declined usage of online tools, and high attrition rates [102], there is a need for collaborative research and participatory action research to sustain a meaningful engagement of knowledge users. We have found only 4 studies addressing users’ salient beliefs and perceptions to design evidence-informed social media platforms for healthy behavior change. Many RDs working fields and dietetic-related outcomes have not yet been portrayed in the social media scientific literature. For example, the use of social media in the fields of child-feeding behaviors, food skills self-efficacy and acquisition, and the dissemination and implementation of social media-based nutrition interventions are yet to be investigated. As opposed to other fields in health care, such as medicine [103-105] and online health communities [106] for which content analyses of social media tools have been previously published, we only identified 2 content analysis studies of social media written by RDs and both focused on food blogs. Further comparative content analysis of social media written by RDs compared with layperson would help deepen our understanding of the quality and extent of nutrition information disseminated through social media. In addition, despite the unprecedented growth in the popularity of social media worldwide [107], recent studies have highlighted social inequalities in health, notably older and less educated individuals who represent an important percentage of the population who uses the Internet for health purposes [108,109]. Most of the evidence regarding the effectiveness and the use of social media in dietetic practice is based on adult populations living in developed countries such as the United States, Australia, and Canada, thus limiting the generalization of the results to other populations. Finally, women were the target population in most of the studies included in this review. It is now well recognized that women and men differ in their dietary intakes, eating behaviors, and meal preparation and cooking skills [110-113], and previous studies have identified gender differences on specific social media platforms usage (ie, women are more likely than men to use Pinterest, Facebook, and Instagram [114] and health forums [115]). Thus, there is a need for more research on gender-sensitive dietary interventions delivered through social media.
Limitations
This scoping review was subject to some limitations that must be acknowledged. First, as performed in previous scoping reviews of social media use in health care settings [95,116], we categorized studies according to Kaplan and Haenlein’s social media definition [7], and we thought it was important to also include discussion forums as they represent the earliest form of user-generated content online. This methodological consideration orients the conclusions that can be drawn from this review. Second, despite an exhaustive search in relevant scientific databases and the reference lists of the identified studies as well as the gray literature, we cannot exclude the possibility that we missed some studies. Third, we included only studies written in English or French for time and budget constraints. Finally, given the fast-growing adoption of social media by health care professionals [9,10], we anticipate that the social media in dietetic practice literature will expand exponentially; this scoping review is limited to peer-reviewed studies or gray literature published before November 2016 (with the addition of one study [94]).
Conclusions
Research on social media in dietetic practice is at its infancy, but it is growing fast. So far, this field of research has targeted limited social media platforms (ie, discussion forums, blogs, and Facebook), which were mostly evaluated in multiple-component interventions for weight management among overweight or obese adults. Trials isolating the effects and mechanisms of action of specific social media platforms are needed to draw clear conclusions regarding the effectiveness of those tools to support cost-effective and clinically significant behavior change. More work is also needed on barriers and facilitators underlying the use of social media written by RDs, and how to make these tools useful for RDs to reach patients and health consumers with diverse sociodemographic characteristics to improve dietary behaviors and help reduce social inequalities in health.
Multimedia Appendix 1
Medline search term strategy and number of results (November 2016).
Multimedia Appendix 2
Characteristics of included studies.
Multimedia Appendix 3
Types of outcomes assessed in intervention studies using social media comparing single or multiple intervention groups with a control group with no social media access (N=14 studies).
AbbreviationsRD
registered dietitian
SMART
Social Mobile Approaches to Reduce weighT
Funding for this project was provided by the Canadian Foundation for Dietetic Research. The funders had no role in the study design, data collection, and analysis; decision to publish; or preparation of the manuscript. The authors gratefully thank Daniela Zavala Mora, the medical information specialist, for her advice on search strategies in scientific databases, as well the knowledge users who collaborated with the authors for their input in the review process.
None declared.
NCD Risk Factor Collaboration (NCD-RisC)Trends in adult body-mass index in 200 countries from 1975 to 2014: a pooled analysis of 1698 population-based measurement studies with 19·2 million participants20160402387100261377139610.1016/S0140-6736(16)30054-X27115820S0140-6736(16)30054-XNCD Risk Factor Collaboration (NCD-RisC)Worldwide trends in diabetes since 1980: a pooled analysis of 751 population-based studies with 4.4 million participants201604093871002715133010.1016/S0140-6736(16)00618-827061677S0140-6736(16)00618-8PMC5081106NCD Risk Factor Collaboration (NCD-RisC)Worldwide trends in blood pressure from 1975 to 2015: a pooled analysis of 1479 population-based measurement studies with 19·1 million participants2017120738910064375510.1016/S0140-6736(16)31919-527863813S0140-6736(16)31919-5PMC5220163Kamel BoulosMNWheelerSThe emerging Web 2.0 social software: an enabling suite of sociable technologies in health and health care education20070324122310.1111/j.1471-1842.2007.00701.x17331140HIR701AmanteDJHoganTPPagotoSLEnglishTMLapaneKLAccess to care and use of the Internet to search for health information: results from the US National Health Interview Survey2015174e10610.2196/jmir.412625925943v17i4e106PMC4430679TanSSGoonawardeneNInternet health information seeking and the patient-physician relationship: a systematic review20170119191e910.2196/jmir.572928104579v19i1e9PMC5290294KaplanAMHaenleinMUsers of the world, unite! The challenges and opportunities of Social Media20101531596810.1016/j.bushor.2009.09.003AntheunisMLTatesKNieboerTEPatients' and health professionals' use of social media in health care: motives, barriers and expectations2013099234263110.1016/j.pec.2013.06.02023899831S0738-3991(13)00265-6RollsKHansenMJacksonDElliottDHow health care professionals use social media to create virtual communities: an integrative review20160616186e16610.2196/jmir.531227328967v18i6e166PMC4933801VentolaCLSocial media and health care professionals: benefits, risks, and best practices20140739749152025083128PMC4103576MortensenAFergusonM20162017-11-21The guide to dietitians' social media habits
http://appetitecommunications.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/ACDC-2016-Guide-to-Dietitians-Social-Media-Habits.pdfPagotoSWaringMEMayCNDingEYKunzWHHayesROleskiJLAdapting behavioral interventions for social media delivery2016181e2410.2196/jmir.508626825969v18i1e24PMC4752690McGloinAFEslamiSDigital and social media opportunities for dietary behaviour change2015057421394810.1017/S002966511400150525319345S0029665114001505TobeyLNKoenigHFBrownNAManoreMMReaching low-income mothers to improve family fruit and vegetable intake: food hero social marketing campaign-research steps, development and testing201609138956210.3390/nu809056227649233nu8090562PMC5037547TobeyLNManoreMMSocial media and nutrition education: the food hero experience20144621283310.1016/j.jneb.2013.09.01324220043S1499-4046(13)00679-9SullivanDGoetzJGibsonCWashburnRSmithBLeeJGeraldSFinchamTDonnellyJEImproving weight maintenance using virtual reality (Second Life)2013453264810.1016/j.jneb.2012.10.00723622351S1499-4046(12)00667-7JaneMHaggerMFosterJHoSKaneRPalSEffects of a weight management program delivered by social media on weight and metabolic syndrome risk factors in overweight and obese adults: a randomised controlled trial2017126e017832610.1371/journal.pone.017832628575048PONE-D-16-39809PMC5456050CapletteMEProvencherVBissonnette-MaheuxVDugrenierMLapointeAGagnonMPStrausSDesrochesSIncreasing fruit and vegetable consumption through a healthy eating blog: a feasibility study2017041864e5910.2196/resprot.662228420600v6i4e59PMC5413798HelmJJonesRMPractice paper of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics: social media and the dietetics practitioner: opportunities, challenges, and best practices201611116111825183510.1016/j.jand.2016.09.00327788767S2212-2672(16)31071-12017-08-29Dietitians of Canada
https://twitter.com/DietitiansCAN20172017-08-29Member Blogs
https://www.dietitians.ca/Media/Member-Blogs.aspxHelmJFrommL20162017-08-29http://www.nutritionblognetwork.com/ArkseyHO'MalleyLScoping studies: towards a methodological framework20050281193210.1080/1364557032000119616LapointeADumasAADesrochesS20172017-11-29Open Science FrameworkUsers, uses and effects of social media in dietetic practice: a scoping review of the quantitative and qualitative evidence Internet
https://osf.io/r4gpn/LevacDColquhounHO'BrienKKScoping studies: advancing the methodology2010092056910.1186/1748-5908-5-69208546771748-5908-5-69PMC2954944RollettHLuxMStrohmaierMDosingerGTochtermannKThe Web 2.0 way of learning with technologies2007318710710.1504/IJLT.2007.012368ArchambaultPMvan de BeltTHGrajales 3rdFJFaberMJKuziemskyCEGagnonSBilodeauARiouxSNelenWLGagnonMTurgeonAFAubinKGoldIPoitrasJEysenbachGKremerJALégaréFWikis and collaborative writing applications in health care: a scoping review2013101510e21010.2196/jmir.278724103318v15i10e210PMC3929050BarronP20112018-01-30How Google Works
http://www.internetatschools.com/Articles/Editorial/Features/How-Google-Works-Are-Search-Engines-Really-Dumb-and-Why-Should-Educators-Care-73090.aspxCoulterAEllinsJEffectiveness of strategies for informing, educating, and involving patients2007077335760924710.1136/bmj.39246.581169.8017615222335/7609/24PMC1910640CoulterAPatient safety: what role can patients play?20060993205610.1111/j.1369-7625.2006.00405.x16911134HEX405PMC5060356GagnonMDesmartisMLabrecqueMCarJPagliariCPluyePFrémontPGagnonJTremblayNLégaréFSystematic review of factors influencing the adoption of information and communication technologies by healthcare professionals2012023612417710.1007/s10916-010-9473-420703721PMC4011799O'GradyLWittemanHBenderJLUrowitzSWiljerDJadadARMeasuring the impact of a moving target: towards a dynamic framework for evaluating collaborative adaptive interactive technologies2009112e2010.2196/jmir.105819632973v11i2e20PMC2762807EloSKyngäsHThe qualitative content analysis process2008046211071510.1111/j.1365-2648.2007.04569.x18352969JAN4569AaseSToward e-professionalism: thinking through the implications of navigating the digital world201010110101442, 1444, 14467, passim10.1016/j.jada.2010.08.02020869480S0002-8223(10)01354-4ArsandETufanoJTRalstonJDHjortdahlPDesigning mobile dietary management support technologies for people with diabetes20081473293210.1258/jtt.2008.0070011885231014/7/329AyresEJThe impact of social media on business and ethical practices in dietetics2013111131115394310.1016/j.jand.2013.09.02024144076S2212-2672(13)01516-5BaghaeiNKimaniSFreyneJBrindalEBerkovskySSmithGEngaging families in lifestyle changes through social networking201110271097199010.1080/10447318.2011.555315Bissonnette-MaheuxVProvencherVLapointeADugrenierMDumasAPluyePStrausSGagnonMPDesrochesSExploring women's beliefs and perceptions about healthy eating blogs: a qualitative study20150408174e8710.2196/jmir.350425858777v17i4e87PMC4407018BonacinaSPriviteraYAMarsilioSMontinEPassarelliFMasseroliMPinciroliFA web-based tool for cooperating behaviors in eating and physical activity control2009144155919592754BrownTFindlayMvon DincklageJDavidsonWHillJIsenringETalwarBBellKKissNKurmisRLoeligerJSandisonATaylorKBauerJUsing a wiki platform to promote guidelines internationally and maintain their currency: evidence-based guidelines for the nutritional management of adult patients with head and neck cancer2013042621829010.1111/jhn.1203623336961CavalloDNSisnerosJARonayAARobbinsCLJilcott PittsSBKeyserlingTCNiAMorrowJVuMBJohnstonLFSamuel-HodgeCDAssessing the feasibility of a web-based weight loss intervention for low-income women of reproductive age: a pilot study201651e3010.2196/resprot.486526920252v5i1e30PMC4788741ChoiYLeeMJKangHCLeeMSYoonSDevelopment and application of a web-based nutritional management program to improve dietary behaviors for the prevention of metabolic syndrome2014053252324110.1097/CIN.000000000000005424651253ClaesNJacobsNThe PreCardio-study protocol--a randomized clinical trial of a multidisciplinary electronic cardiovascular prevention programme2007090472710.1186/1471-2261-7-27177849461471-2261-7-27PMC2045658CollinsCMorganPJonesPFletcherKMartinJAguiarELucasANeveMMcElduffPCallisterREvaluation of a commercial web-based weight loss and weight loss maintenance program in overweight and obese adults: a randomized controlled trial201011031066910.1186/1471-2458-10-669210474321471-2458-10-669PMC2989963CollinsCEMorganPJHutchessonMJCallisterREfficacy of standard versus enhanced features in a Web-based commercial weight-loss program for obese adults, part 2: randomized controlled trial2013157e14010.2196/jmir.262623876832v15i7e140PMC3786000CollinsCEMorganPJJonesPFletcherKMartinJAguiarEJLucasANeveMJCallisterRA 12-week commercial web-based weight-loss program for overweight and obese adults: randomized controlled trial comparing basic versus enhanced features2012142e5710.2196/jmir.198022555246v14i2e57PMC3376507ConneryGCSteiberAUsing second life virtual computer world as a training tool for the subjective global assessment (SGA)201206312A3210.1016/j.krcp.2012.04.389DickinsonWPGlasgowREFisherLDickinsonLMChristensenSMEstabrooksPAMillerBFUse of a website to accomplish health behavior change: if you build it, will they come? And will it work if they do?20132621687610.3122/jabfm.2013.02.1103442347193026/2/168DumasALemieuxSLapointeADugrenierMDesrochesSA comparative content analysis of vegetarian food blogs written by registered dietitians and non-registered dietitians20171201782869110.3148/cjdpr-2017-00128333554DumasAALemieuxSLapointeAProvencherVRobitailleJDesrochesSDevelopment of an evidence-informed blog to promote healthy eating among mothers: use of the intervention mapping protocol2017051965e9210.2196/resprot.714728526669v6i5e92PMC5457529GodinoJGMerchantGNormanGJDonohueMCMarshallSJFowlerJHCalfasKJHuangJSRockCLGriswoldWGGuptaARaabFFoggBJRobinsonTNPatrickKUsing social and mobile tools for weight loss in overweight and obese young adults (Project SMART): a 2 year, parallel-group, randomised, controlled trial201609497475510.1016/S2213-8587(16)30105-X27426247S2213-8587(16)30105-XPMC5005009GoldBBurkeSPintauroSBuzzellPHarvey-BerinoJWeight loss on the web: a pilot study comparing a structured behavioral intervention to a commercial program2007011511556410.1038/oby.2007.5201722804315/1/155GrahamLKWhat is social networking? And how do I get clued in to LinkedIn?200901109118410.1016/j.jada.2008.11.01619103338S0002-8223(08)02122-6HalesSBDavidsonCTurner-McGrievyGMVarying social media post types differentially impacts engagement in a behavioral weight loss intervention201412443556210.1007/s13142-014-0274-z25584084274PMC4286554HebdenLBalestracciKMcGeechanKDenney-WilsonEHarrisMBaumanAAllman-FarinelliM'TXT2BFiT' a mobile phone-based healthy lifestyle program for preventing unhealthy weight gain in young adults: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial20130318147510.1186/1745-6215-14-75235060131745-6215-14-75PMC3610110HebdenLCookAvan der PloegHPKingLBaumanAAllman-FarinelliMA mobile health intervention for weight management among young adults: a pilot randomised controlled trial2014082743223210.1111/jhn.1215523992038HutchessonMJCollinsCEMorganPJWatsonJFGuestMCallisterRChanges to dietary intake during a 12-week commercial web-based weight loss program: a randomized controlled trial201401681647010.1038/ejcn.2013.19424129359ejcn2013194KarpinskiCA2012USProQuest Information & LearningLonginRGrasseMAspalterRWaldherrKEffectiveness of the online weight reduction program KiloCoach™ and comparison with other evaluated commercial direct intervention and online programs2012533728310.1159/00033972622722385000339726LugerEAspalterRLugerMLonginRRiederADornerTEChanges of dietary patterns during participation in a web-based weight-reduction programme20160519712112110.1017/S136898001500285226411757S1368980015002852LynchMHealthy habits or damaging diets: an exploratory study of a food blogging community20104943163510.1080/03670244.2010.49105421888474LynchMFrom food to fuel20101118711727910.1177/0017896910386284MarkertJHergetSMarschkeSLehnertTFalkenbergCBlüherSCase management via telephone counseling and SMS for weight maintenance in adolescent obesity: study concept of the TeAM program20141810.1186/2052-9538-1-8262175008PMC4472620McDarbyVHeveyDCodyDEvaluation of a social media site to improve diabetes glycaemic control, knowledge and self-efficacy: the ASSIST study2015Joint Annual Conference of the International Society for Pediatric and Adolescent Diabetes and Australasian Paediatric Endocrine GroupOctober 7-10, 2015Brisbane, AustraliaO'BrienKHutchessonMJJensenMMorganPCallisterRCollinsCEParticipants in an online weight loss program can improve diet quality during weight loss: a randomized controlled trial20140809138210.1186/1475-2891-13-82251085061475-2891-13-82PMC4266894PapadakiAScottJThe Mediterranean eating in Scotland experience project: evaluation of an Internet-based intervention promoting the Mediterranean diet200508942290816115365S0007114505001844PapadakiAScottJAFollow-up of a web-based tailored intervention promoting the Mediterranean diet in Scotland2008117322566310.1016/j.pec.2008.05.03018640000S0738-3991(08)00282-6PapadakiAScottJAProcess evaluation of an innovative healthy eating website promoting the Mediterranean diet2006042122061810.1093/her/cyh05716199490cyh057PartridgeSRAllman-FarinelliMMcGeechanKBalestracciKWongATHebdenLHarrisMFBaumanAPhongsavanPProcess evaluation of TXT2BFiT: a multi-component mHealth randomised controlled trial to prevent weight gain in young adults2016011913710.1186/s12966-016-0329-22678563710.1186/s12966-016-0329-2PMC4717560PartridgeSRBalestracciKWongATHebdenLMcGeechanKDenney-WilsonEHarrisMFPhongsavanPBaumanAAllman-FarinelliMEffective Strategies to recruit young adults into the TXT2BFiT mHealth randomized controlled trial for weight gain prevention201542e6610.2196/resprot.426826048581v4i2e66PMC4526902PartridgeSRMcGeechanKHebdenLBalestracciKWongATDenney-WilsonEHarrisMFPhongsavanPBaumanAAllman-FarinelliMEffectiveness of a mHealth lifestyle program with telephone Ssport (TXT2BFiT) to prevent unhealthy weight gain in young adults: randomized controlled trial201532e6610.2196/mhealth.453026076688v3i2e66PMC4526939PatrickKMarshallSJDavilaEPKolodziejczykJKFowlerJHCalfasKJHuangJSRockCLGriswoldWGGuptaAMerchantGNormanGJRaabFDonohueMCFoggBJRobinsonTNDesign and implementation of a randomized controlled social and mobile weight loss trial for young adults (project SMART)20140137110810.1016/j.cct.2013.11.00124215774S1551-7144(13)00172-9PMC3910290PeregrinTPin it to win it: using pinterest to promote your niche services201212112121930410.1016/j.jand.2012.09.02623174679S2212-2672(12)01653-XPeregrinTClearing up copyright confusion and social media use: what nutrition and dietetics practitioners need to know201704117462362510.1016/j.jand.2017.01.01528343524S2212-2672(17)30078-3PetersenRSillSLuCYoungJEdingtonDWEffectiveness of employee internet-based weight management program2008025021637110.1097/JOM.0b013e31815c6cf61830117300043764-200802000-00009Po'eEHeermanWMistryRBarkinSGrowing Right Onto Wellness (GROW): a family-centered, community-based obesity prevention randomized controlled trial for preschool child-parent pairs2013113624364910.1016/j.cct.2013.08.01324012890S1551-7144(13)00151-1PMC3886237RuggieroLMoadsiriAQuinnLTRileyBBDanielsonKKMonahanCBangsVAGerberBSDiabetes island: preliminary impact of a virtual world self-care educational intervention for african americans with type 2 diabetes201422pii: e1010.2196/games.326025584346PMC4288760SchumacherJ2009USIllinois State University, ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Globalhttps://search.proquest.com/openview/ec1a5cc7b360505ee66c5f126a4eb4d9/1?pq-origsite=gscholar&cbl=18750&diss=ySmithKLanningham-FosterLWelchACampbellCWeb-based behavioral intervention increases maternal exercise but does not prevent excessive gestational weight gain in previously sedentary women2016061365879310.1123/jpah.2015-0219265948202015-0219StarkCMGraham-KieferMLDevineCMDollahiteJSOlsonCMOnline course increases nutrition professionals' knowledge, skills, and self-efficacy in using an ecological approach to prevent childhood obesity20114353162210.1016/j.jneb.2011.01.01021906545S1499-4046(11)00043-1StarkCMPopeJMassive open online courses: how registered dietitians use MOOCs for nutrition education201408114811475510.1016/j.jand.2014.04.00124842306S2212-2672(14)00362-1SullivanDGoetzJGibsonCWashburnRASmithBKLeeJGeraldSFinchamTDonnellyJEImproving weight maintenance using virtual reality (Second Life)2013453264810.1016/j.jneb.2012.10.00723622351S1499-4046(12)00667-7SullivanDKGoetzJRGibsonCAMayoMSWashburnRALeeYPtomeyLTDonnellyJEA virtual reality intervention (Second Life) to improve weight maintenance: Rationale and design for an 18-month randomized trial20160146778410.1016/j.cct.2015.11.01926616535S1551-7144(15)30130-0PMC4696382Turner-McGrievyGDavidsonCWingardEBillingsDLow glycemic index vegan or low-calorie weight loss diets for women with polycystic ovary syndrome: a randomized controlled feasibility study201406346552810.1016/j.nutres.2014.04.01125026923S0271-5317(14)00068-2Turner-McGrievyGMDavidsonCRWilcoxSDoes the type of weight loss diet affect who participates in a behavioral weight loss intervention? A comparison of participants for a plant-based diet versus a standard diet trial201402731566210.1016/j.appet.2013.11.00824269507S0195-6663(13)00453-4PMC3932532WaterlanderWWhittakerRMcRobbieHDoreyEBallKMaddisonRMyersSKCrawfordDJiangYGuYMichieJNiMCDevelopment of an evidence-based mHealth weight management program using a formative research process201423e1810.2196/mhealth.285025098337v2i3e18PMC4125156WebberKHRoseSAA pilot Internet-based behavioral weight loss intervention with or without commercially available portion-controlled foods201309219E354910.1002/oby.2033123408562WebberKHTateDFMichaelBJA randomized comparison of two motivationally enhanced Internet behavioral weight loss programs2008094691090510.1016/j.brat.2008.06.00818675402S0005-7967(08)00118-6WebberKHGabrieleJMTateDFDignanMBThe effect of a motivational intervention on weight loss is moderated by level of baseline controlled motivation201001227410.1186/1479-5868-7-420157441PMC2821313WebberKHLeeEThe diet quality of adult women participating in a behavioural weight-loss programme201108244360910.1111/j.1365-277X.2011.01159.x21414046WebberKHTateDFWardDSBowlingJMMotivation and its relationship to adherence to self-monitoring and weight loss in a 16-week Internet behavioral weight loss intervention2010423161710.1016/j.jneb.2009.03.00120138583S1499-4046(09)00025-6WillcoxJCCampbellKJMcCarthyEAWilkinsonSALappasMBallKFjeldsoeBGriffithsAWhittakerRMaddisonRShubAPiddDFraserEMoshonasNCrawfordDATesting the feasibility of a mobile technology intervention promoting healthy gestational weight gain in pregnant women (txt4two) - study protocol for a randomised controlled trial201505071620910.1186/s13063-015-0730-12594757810.1186/s13063-015-0730-1PMC4426547WillisEASzabo-ReedANPtomeyLTStegerFLHonasJJAl-HihiEMLeeRVansaghiLWashburnRADonnellyJEDistance learning strategies for weight management utilizing social media: A comparison of phone conference call versus social media platform. Rationale and design for a randomized study20160347282810.1016/j.cct.2016.02.00526883282S1551-7144(16)30019-2PMC4889333Bissonnette-MaheuxVDumasAAProvencherVLapointeADugrenierMStrausSGagnonMDesrochesSWomen's perceptions of usefulness and ease of use of four healthy eating blog characteristics: a qualitative study of 33 French-Canadian women20171026pii: S2212-2672(17)31242-X10.1016/j.jand.2017.08.01229107587S2212-2672(17)31242-XHammMPChisholmAShulhanJMilneAScottSDGivenLMHartlingLSocial media use among patients and caregivers: a scoping review201335pii: e00281910.1136/bmjopen-2013-00281923667163bmjopen-2013-002819PMC3651969SharmaSSDe ChoudhuryMMeasuring and characterizing nutritional information of food and ingestion content in Instagram2015Proceedings of the 24th International Conference on World Wide WebMay 18-22, 2015Florence, Italy115610.1145/2740908.2742754HolmbergCEHillmanTBergCAdolescents' presentation of food in social media: An explorative study201604019912112910.1016/j.appet.2016.01.00926792765S0195-6663(16)30008-3CoarySPoorMHow consumer-generated images shape important consumption outcomes in the food domain201601113311810.1108/JCM-02-2015-1337SoJPrestinALeeLWangYYenJChouWSWhat do people like to “Share” about obesity? A content analysis of frequent retweets about obesity on Twitter201631219320610.1080/10410236.2014.94067526086083VidalLAresGMachínLJaegerSRUsing Twitter data for food-related consumer research: A case study on “what people say when tweeting about different eating situations”20151045586910.1016/j.foodqual.2015.05.006VandelanotteCMüllerAShortCHingleMNathanNWilliamsSLopezMlParekhSMaherCaPast, present, and future of eHealth and mHealth research to improve physical activity and dietary behaviors201603483219228.e110.1016/j.jneb.2015.12.006EysenbachGThe law of attrition200571e1110.2196/jmir.7.1.e1115829473v7e11PMC1550631Tapi NzaliMDBringaySLavergneCMolleviCOpitzTWhat patients can tell us: topic analysis for social media on breast cancer2017073153e2310.2196/medinform.777928760725v5i3e23PMC5556259RamkumarPNNavarroSMHaeberleHSChughtaiMFlynnMEMontMASocial media and total joint arthroplasty: an analysis of patient utilization on Instagram2017093292694270010.1016/j.arth.2017.03.06728456560S0883-5403(17)30304-2Gage-BouchardEALaValleySMollicaMBeaupinLKCancer communication on social media: examining how cancer Caregivers use Facebook for cancer-related communication201740433233810.1097/NCC.000000000000041827442210LuYWuYLiuJLiJZhangPUnderstanding health care social media use from different stakeholder perspectives: a content analysis of an online health community20170407194e10910.2196/jmir.708728389418v19i4e109PMC5400888SmithK20162017-08-30Marketing: 105 amazing social media statistics and facts
https://www.brandwatch.com/blog/96-amazing-social-media-statistics-and-facts-for-2016/MasseyPMWhere do U.S. adults who do not use the Internet get health information? Examining digital health information disparities from 2008 to 201320162111182410.1080/10810730.2015.105844426166484LatulippeKHamelCGirouxDSocial health inequalities and eHealth: a literature review with qualitative synthesis of theoretical and empirical studies20170427194e13610.2196/jmir.673128450271v19i4e136PMC5427250LeblancVBéginCCorneauLDodinSLemieuxSGender differences in dietary intakes: what is the contribution of motivational variables?201502281374610.1111/jhn.1221324527882ProvencherVDrapeauVTremblayADesprésJLemieuxSEating behaviors and indexes of body composition in men and women from the Québec family study2003061167839210.1038/oby.2003.10912805400PainchaudGGLemieuxSDoucetEPomerleauSProvencherVInfluence of nutrition claims on appetite sensations according to sex, weight status, and restrained eating20162016947547610.1155/2016/947547627725885PMC5048035SlaterJJMudryjANSelf-perceived eating habits and food skills of Canadians2016487486495.e110.1016/j.jneb.2016.04.39727373863S1499-4046(16)30516-4AndersonM20152017-10-11Men catch up with women on overall social media use
http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2015/08/28/men-catch-up-with-women-on-overall-social-media-use/SadahSAShahbaziMWileyMTHristidisVA study of the demographics of web-based health-related social media users2015178e19410.2196/jmir.430826250986v17i8e194HammMPChisholmAShulhanJMilneAScottSDKlassenTPHartlingLSocial media use by health care professionals and trainees: a scoping review20130988913768310.1097/ACM.0b013e31829eb91c23887004