The use of social media for reproductive health advocacy among physicians: a content analysis of tweets by physicians engaged in reproductive health care

References

• Sharma E, Saha K, Ernala SK, Ghoshal S, De Choudhury M. Analyzing ideological discourse on social media: a case study of the abortion debate. Paper presented at Proceedings of the 2017 International Conference of The Computational Social Science Society of the Americas; 2017 June 1–15.
   Google Scholar
• Guo C, Saxton GD. Tweeting social change: How social media are changing nonprofit advocacy. Nonprofit Volunt Sect Q. 2014;43(1):57–79. doi:10.1177/0899764012471585.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Steinberg SB. # Advocacy: social media activism's power to transform law. Ky LJ. 2016;105:413.
   Google Scholar
• Young JA. Facebook, Twitter, and blogs: The adoption and utilization of social media in nonprofit human service organizations. Hum Serv Organ. 2017;41(1):44–57. doi:10.1080/23303131.2016.1192574.
   Google Scholar
• Bossetta M. The digital architectures of social media: comparing political campaigning on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and Snapchat in the 2016 US election. J Mass Commun Q. 2018;95(2):471–96. doi:10.1177/1077699018763307.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van der Graaf A, Otjes S, Rasmussen A. Weapon of the weak? The social media landscape of interest groups. Eur J Commun. 2016;31(2):120–35. doi:10.1177/0267323115612210.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Levinsohn E, Weisenthal K, Wang P, Shahu A, Meizlish M, Robledo-Gil T, et al. No time for silence: An urgent need for political activism Among the medical community. Acad Med. 2017;92(9):1231–3. doi:10.1097/ACM.0000000000001724.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Halpin DR, Fraussen B, Ackland R. Which audiences engage With advocacy groups on Twitter? Explaining the online engagement of elite, peer, and mass audiences With advocacy groups. Nonprofit Volunt Sect Q. 2021;50(4):842–65. doi:10.1177/0899764020979818.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hunt K. Twitter, social movements, and claiming allies in abortion debates. J Inf Technol Polit. 2019;16(4):394–410. doi:10.1080/19331681.2019.1659901.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gupta K, Ripberger J, Wehde W. Advocacy group messaging on social media: using the narrative policy framework to study Twitter messages about nuclear energy policy in the United States. Policy Stud J. 2018;46(1):119–36. doi:10.1111/psj.12176.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Attai DJ, Cowher MS, Al-Hamadani M, Schoger JM, Staley AC, Landercasper J. Twitter social media is an effective tool for breast cancer patient education and support: patient-reported outcomes by survey. J Med Internet Res. 2015;17(7):e4721.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pattison A, Cipolli IIIW, Marichal J. The devil we know and the angel that did not fly: An examination of devil/angel shift in Twitter fracking “debates” in NY 2008–2018. Rev Policy Res. 2021;39(1):51–72.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Supovitz J, Daly AJ, Del Fresno M. The Common Core debate on Twitter and the rise of the activist public. J Educ Change. 2018;19(4):419–40. doi:10.1007/s10833-018-9327-2.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gelfgren S, Ineland J, Cocq C. Social media and disability advocacy organizations: caught between hopes and realities. Disabil Soc. 2020;37(7):1085–106.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Almog-Bar M, Schmid H. Advocacy activities of nonprofit human service organizations: A critical review. Nonprofit Volunt Sect Q. 2014;43(1):11–35. doi:10.1177/0899764013502584.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kligler-Vilenchik N, Baden C, Yarchi M. Interpretative polarization across platforms: How political disagreement develops over time on Facebook, Twitter, and WhatsApp. Social Media+ Society. 2020;6(3):205–9.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Syrdal HA, Briggs E. Engagement with social media content: A qualitative exploration. J Market Theory Pract. 2018;26(1-2):4–22. doi:10.1080/10696679.2017.1389243.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mizuno A, Rewley J, Kishi T, et al. Relationship between official Twitter ambassadors and the number of retweets in the annual congress―“Tweet the Meeting”―. Circ Reports. 2021;3(7):414–8. doi:10.1253/circrep.CR-21-0063.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Hemsley J, Stromer-Galley J, Semaan B, Tanupabrungsun S. Tweeting to the target: candidates’ use of strategic messages and@ mentions on Twitter. J Inform Technol Polit. 2018;15(1):3–18. doi:10.1080/19331681.2017.1338634.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang B, Zhuang J. Crisis information distribution on Twitter: a content analysis of tweets during Hurricane Sandy. Nat Hazards. 2017;89(1):161–81. doi:10.1007/s11069-017-2960-x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cheplygina V, Hermans F, Albers C, Bielczyk N, Smeets I. Ten simple rules for getting started on Twitter as a scientist. San Francisco (CA): Public Library of Science; 2020.
   Google Scholar
• Garcia-Retamero R, Cokely ET. Effective communication of risks to young adults: using message framing and visual aids to increase condom use and STD screening. J Exp Psychol Appl. 2011;17(3):270–87. doi:10.1037/a0023677.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leshner G, Cheng IH. The effects of frame, appeal, and outcome extremity of antismoking messages on cognitive processing. Health Commun. 2009;24(3):219–27. doi:10.1080/10410230902804117.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Biener L, Ji M, Gilpin EA, Albers AB. The impact of emotional tone, message, and broadcast parameters in youth anti-smoking advertisements. J Health Commun. 2004;9(3):259–74. doi:10.1080/10810730490447084.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McLaughlin ML, Hou J, Meng J, et al. Propagation of information about preexposure prophylaxis (PrEP) for HIV prevention through Twitter. Health Commun. 2016;31(8):998–1007. doi:10.1080/10410236.2015.1027033.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sleigh J, Amann J, Schneider M, Vayena E. Qualitative analysis of visual risk communication on Twitter during the COVID-19 pandemic. BMC Public Health. 2021;21(1):810. doi:10.1186/s12889-021-10851-4.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bjola C, Manor I. Revisiting Putnam’s two-level game theory in the digital age: domestic digital diplomacy and the Iran nuclear deal. Cambridge Rev Int Aff. 2018;31(1):3–32. doi:10.1080/09557571.2018.1476836.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Entman RM. Framing: towards clarification of a fractured paradigm. In: McQuail D, editor. Mcquail's reader in mass communication theory. Amsterdam, Netherlands: Sage; 1993. p. 390–7.
   Google Scholar
• Dorfman L, Wallack L, Woodruff K. More than a message: framing public health advocacy to change corporate practices. Health Educ Behav. 2005;32(3):320–36. doi:10.1177/1090198105275046.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Entman RM. Framing bias: media in the distribution of power. J Commun. 2007;57(1):163–73. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2006.00336.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thibodeau PH, Boroditsky L. Metaphors we think with: the role of metaphor in reasoning. PLoS One. 2011;6(2):e16782. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0016782.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Meyer G, Roberto AJ, Atkin CK. A radio-based approach to promoting gun safety: process and outcome evaluation implications and insights. Health Commun. 2003;15(3):299–318. doi:10.1207/S15327027HC1503_3.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jenkins A, Hsu KS. American ideals & (and) human rights: findings from new public opinion research by the opportunity agenda. Fordham L Rev. 2008;77:439.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Westen D. A new way to talk about the social determinants of health. 2010.
   Google Scholar
• Roe v Wade. 410 United States 113. 1973.
   Google Scholar
• Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization. 597 United States 215. 2022.
   Google Scholar
• Manze M, Kwan A, Jones H, etal Sexual and reproductive health advocacy successes, failures, and needs in the United States: perspectives from key stakeholders. Health Promot Pract. 2022;25(2):183–7.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Manze M, Romero D, Kwan A, Ellsworth TR, Jones H. Physician perspectives of abortion advocacy: findings from a mixed-methods study. BMJ Sex Reprod Health. 2023;49(1):7–11. doi:10.1136/bmjsrh-2021-201394.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jones H, Manze M, Brakman A, etal Physician engagement in reproductive health advocacy: findings from a mixed methods evaluation of a leadership and advocacy program. BMC Med Educ. 2024;24(1):476.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Freberg K. Social media for strategic communication: creative strategies and research-based applications. Los Angeles: Sage Publications; 2018.
   Google Scholar
• Ahmed W. Public health implications of #ShoutYourAbortion. Public Health. 2018;163:35–41. doi:10.1016/j.puhe.2018.06.010.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar