#ec: Findings and implications from a quantitative content analysis of tweets about emergency contraception

Tilly A. Gurman · Tiffany Clark

14 citations0/0 files storedDigital Health

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

Social Media in Health Education Reproductive Health and Contraception Public Relations and Crisis Communication

Abstract

Twitter, a popular social media, helps users around the world quickly share and receive information. The way in which Twitter frames health issues – especially controversial issues like emergency contraception (EC) – can influence public opinion. The current study analyzed all English-language EC-related tweets from March 2011 ( n = 3535). Variables measured user characteristics (e.g. gender), content (e.g. news, humor), Twitter-specific strategy (e.g. retweet), and certain time periods (e.g. weekends). The analysis applied chi-square and regression analyses to the variables. Tweets most frequently focused on content related to news (27.27%), accessing EC (27.27%), and humor (25.63%). Among tweets that were shared, however, the most common content included humor, followed by personal/vicarious experience. Although only 5.54% of shared tweets mentioned promiscuity, this content category had the strongest odds for being shared (OR = 1.51; p = 0.031). The tweet content with lowest odds of being shared were side effects (OR = 0.24; p < 0.001), drug safety (OR = 0.44; p < 0.001), and news (OR = 0.44; p < 0.001). Tweets with the greatest odds of having been sent on a weekend sought advice (OR = 1.94; p = 0.012), addressed personal or vicarious experience (OR = 1.91; p < 0.001), or contained humor (OR = 1.56; p < 0.001). Similar patterns occurred in tweets sent around St. Patrick’s Day. Only a few differences were found in the ways in which male and female individuals discussed EC on Twitter. In particular, when compared to males, females mentioned birth control ( p = 0.002), EC side effects ( p = 0.024), and issues related to responsibility ( p = 0.003) more often than expected. Study findings offer timely and practical suggestions for public health professionals wanting to communicate about EC via Twitter.

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 14 citations exist upstream.

References

2006Framing, Agenda Setting, and Priming: The Evolution of Three Media Effects Models 1999Rethinking validity and reliability in content analysis 1999Beyond kappa: A review of interrater agreement measures 2009Take Two Aspirin And Tweet Me In The Morning: How Twitter, Facebook, And Other Social Media Are Reshaping Health Care 2010Dissemination of health information through social networks: Twitter and antibiotics 2011How organizations framed the 2009 H1N1 pandemic via social and traditional media: Implications for U.S. health communicators 2004A Meta-Analysis of Priming Effects on Impression Formation Supporting a General Model of Informational Biases 2015When Location Meets Social Multimedia

Cited by

2022Verhütung in der deutschsprachigen Wikipedia: Eine Inhalts- und Qualitätsanalyse

Explore the map →

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.