Examining the Influence on Perceptions of Endometriosis via Analysis of Social Media Posts: Cross-sectional Study (Preprint)

preprint OA: gold CC0
AI-generated summary by claude@2026-07, 2026-07-09

This study analyzed endometriosis content on Facebook and Instagram, finding "awareness" and "inspiration/support" were common, with humor and personal stories driving engagement, especially on Instagram.

One-sentence paraphrase of the abstract; not a substitute for reading it. No clinical advice. How this works

AI-generated deep summary by claude@2026-07, 2026-07-09 · read from full text

This cross-sectional study systematically searched English Facebook pages and Instagram accounts using “Endometriosis” and “Endo,” then analyzed the 10 most recent posts per account (820 posts total) using qualitative content analysis by two independent examiners, with engagement quantified from likes, comments, and shares stratified by follower count. It identified 39 Facebook pages and 43 Instagram accounts with over 1.395 million total followers, and found that post categories differed by platform: Facebook most often featured Awareness, Education & Research, and Promotion, whereas Instagram most often featured Inspiration & Support, Awareness, and Personal Story. User engagement was higher on Instagram than Facebook (3.20% vs 0.97% of followers per post), and on both platforms engagement peaked for humor/supportive/awareness-related categories. The main limitation is that the analysis is restricted to English accounts with more than 5,000 followers/likes and only the most recent 10 posts per account. This paper is centrally about endometriosis — it categorizes and compares endometriosis-related social media content and engagement on Facebook and Instagram.

Read from the paper's body, not the abstract. Not a substitute for reading the paper. No clinical advice. How this works

Abstract

BACKGROUND Social media platforms, such as Facebook and Instagram, are increasingly being used to share health-related information by “influencers,” regular users, and institutions alike. While patients may benefit in various ways from these interactions, little is known about the types of endometriosis-related information published on social media. As digital opinion leaders influence the perceptions of their followers, physicians need to be aware about ideas and beliefs that are available online, in order to address possible misconceptions and provide optimal patient care. OBJECTIVE The aim of this study was to identify and analyze frequent endometriosis-related discussion topics on social media in order to offer caregivers insight into commonly discussed subject matter and aspects. METHODS We performed a systematic search using predefined parameters. Using the term “endometriosis” in Facebook’s search function and a social media search engine, a list of Facebook pages was generated. A list of Instagram accounts was generated using the terms “endometriosis” and “endo” in Instagram’s search function. Pages and accounts in English with 5000 or more followers or likes were included. Nonpublic, unrelated, or inactive pages and accounts were excluded. For each account, the most recent 10 posts were identified and categorized by two independent examiners using qualitative content analysis. User engagement was calculated using the numbers of interactions (ie, shares, likes, and comments) for each post, stratified by the number of followers. RESULTS A total of 39 Facebook pages and 43 Instagram accounts with approximately 1.4 million followers were identified. Hospitals and medical centers made up 15% (6/39) of the Facebook pages and 5% (2/43) of the Instagram accounts. Top accounts had up to 111,600 (Facebook) and 41,400 (Instagram) followers. A total of 820 posts were analyzed. On Facebook, most posts were categorized as “awareness” (101/390, 25.9% of posts), “education and research” (71/390, 18.2%), and “promotion” (64/390, 16.4%). On Instagram, the top categories were “inspiration and support” (120/430, 27.9% of posts), “awareness” (72/430, 16.7%), and “personal story” (72/430, 16.7%). The frequency of most categories differed significantly between platforms. User engagement was higher on Instagram than on Facebook (3.20% vs 0.97% of followers per post). On Instagram, the highest percentage of users engaged with posts categorized as “humor” (mean 4.19%, SD 4.53%), “personal story” (mean 3.02%, SD 4.95%), and “inspiration and support” (mean 2.83%, SD 3.08%). On Facebook, posts in the categories “awareness” (mean 2.05%, SD 15.56%), “humor” (mean 0.91%, SD 1.07%), and “inspiration and support” (mean 0.56%, SD 1.37%) induced the most user engagement. Posts made by hospitals and medical centers generated higher user engagement than posts by regular accounts on Facebook (mean 1.44%, SD 1.11% vs mean 0.88%, SD 2.71% of followers per post) and Instagram (mean 3.33%, SD 1.21% vs mean 3.19%, SD 2.52% of followers per post). CONCLUSIONS Facebook and Instagram are widely used to share endometriosis-related information among a large number of users. Most posts offer inspiration or support, spread awareness about the disease, or cover personal issues. Followers mostly engage with posts with a humoristic, supportive, and awareness-generating nature. Health care providers should be aware about the topics discussed online, as this may lead to an increased understanding of the needs and demands of digitally proficient patients with endometriosis.
Full text 3,870 characters · extracted from oa-html · 5 sections · click to expand

Abstract

Background: Social media such as Facebook (FB) and Instagram (IG) are increasingly being used to share health-related information by “influencers”, regular users and institutions alike. While patients may benefit in various ways from these interactions, little is known about the type of endometriosis-related information published on social media. As digital opinion leaders influence the perception of their followers, physicians need to be aware about ideas and beliefs available online, in order to address possible misconceptions and provide optimal patient care.

Objective

To analyze and categorize endometriosis-related social media content on Facebook and Instagram.

Methods

We performed a systematic search using predefined parameters. Using the term “Endometriosis” in FB`s search function and a social media search engine, a list of FB pages was generated. A list of IG accounts was generated using the terms “Endometriosis” and “Endo” in IG`s search function. Pages/accounts in English with >5000 followers/likes were included. Nonpublic, unrelated or inactive pages/accounts were excluded. For each account, the most recent 10 posts were identified and categorized by two independent examiners using qualitative content analysis. User engagement was calculated using the numbers of interactions (shares, likes and comments) for each post, stratified by the number of followers.

Results

39 FB pages and 43 IG accounts with a total number of over 1.395 million followers were identified. Hospitals/medical Centers made up for 15% (FB) and 5% (IG) of the accounts. Top accounts had up to 111.6k (FB) and 41.4k (IG) followers. A total of 820 posts were analyzed. On FB, most posts were categorized as “Awareness” (25.9% of posts), “Education & Research” (18.2%) and “Promotion” (16.4%). On IG, the top categories were “Inspiration & Support” (27.9% of posts), “Awareness” (16.7%) and “Personal Story” (16.7%). The frequency of most categories differed significantly between platforms. User engagement was higher on IG than on FB (3.20% vs 0.97% of followers per post). On IG, the highest percentage of users engaged with posts categorized as “Humor” (4.19%), “Personal Story” (3.02%), and “Inspiration & Support” (2.82%). On FB, posts in the categories “Awareness”, “Humour” and “Inspiration & Support” induced most user engagement (2.05%, 0.91% and 0.56%). Accounts from hospitals / medical centers generated a higher user engagement than regular accounts on FB (1.44% vs 0.88%), while on IG, the contrary was found (2.07% vs 3.36%).

Conclusions

FB and IG are widely used to share endometriosis-related information among a large number of users. Most posts offer inspiration or support, spread awareness about the disease or cover personal issues. Followers mostly engage with posts of humoristic, supportive and awareness-generating nature. Healthcare providers should be aware about the topics discussed online, as this may lead to an increased understanding of the needs and demands of the digitally affine endometriosis patients. Citation Request queued. Please wait while the file is being generated. It may take some time. Copyright © The authors. All rights reserved. This is a privileged document currently under peer-review/community review (or an accepted/rejected manuscript). Authors have provided JMIR Publications with an exclusive license to publish this preprint on it's website for review and ahead-of-print citation purposes only. While the final peer-reviewed paper may be licensed under a cc-by license on publication, at this stage authors and publisher expressively prohibit redistribution of this draft paper other than for review purposes.

Text is read by the "Ask this paper" AI Q&A widget below. Extraction quality varies by source — PMC NXML preserves structure cleanly, OA-HTML may include some navigation residue, and OA-PDF can have broken hyphenation. The publisher copy (via DOI) is the canonical version.

My notes (saved in your browser only)

Ask this paper AI returns verbatim quotes from the full text · source: oa-html

Answers must be backed by verbatim quotes from this paper's full text. Hallucinated quotes are dropped automatically; if no verbatim passage answers the question, we say so. How this works

Condition tags

endometriosis

Citation neighborhood

Papers in the corpus that this work cites (lower rings, blue) and that cite this one (upper rings, green). Dot size scales with the paper's in-corpus citation count — bigger dot = more influential within the endo/adeno field. Click a dot to open that paper. [ expand to 2 hops ] — adds papers reached through this work's immediate citers/citees. Heavier; up to 60 extra dots.

References (20)

Source provenance

openalex
last seen: 2026-05-10T10:23:22.614198+00:00
License: CC0 · commercial use OK