Social Media Perceptions Among Young Adults With Cancer - Online Experiment 1
Cancer · Cancer Survivors
De qué trata este estudio
El registro no identifica actualmente este estudio como reclutando. Consulta su estado antes de planificar una evaluación.
- Tipo de estudio
- De intervención
- Fase
- No aplica
- Rango de edad
- 22 años - 39 años
- Sexo admitido
- Todos los sexos
- Voluntarios sanos
- No aceptados
- Participantes
- 505 Real
Estos son puntos de partida, no una decisión de elegibilidad. El equipo debe revisar todos los requisitos.
Las explicaciones y la navegación están en español. Los textos proporcionados por el registro, incluidos títulos, resúmenes y criterios, se conservan en su idioma original. Puedes pedir orientación en español a WCR.
Acerca de la investigación
Young adults with cancer experience more loneliness than their non-cancer peers or older cancer survivors. Positive psychology interventions may increase social connectedness; however, evidence-based interventions should be tailored to young adults with cancer and designed for social media. This study conducted an online experiment with young adults with cancer (ages 22-39) to optimize intervention messages.
Leer la descripción completa
To examine how message types and personal stories influence reactions, the study used a mixed between-within online experiment. The researchers hypothesized that four message types (connected peer advocates, lonely peer advocates, cancer peers, and clinicians) would lead to greater perceived message effectiveness in encouraging positive in-person social interactions and stronger intended message reactions compared with control messages (H1). They also hypothesized that including a personal story (cancer-related or general) would improve perceived message effectiveness and intended message reactions (H2). Unintended message reactions were also explored.
¿Quién podría participar?
La lista siguiente contiene el texto del patrocinador. Puede incluir condiciones, tratamientos previos, resultados de pruebas y otros requisitos. Aparecer en tu búsqueda no significa que califiques.
Inclusion Criteria:
- Participants must be 22-39 years old at the time of the study
- Participants must have received a cancer diagnosis at any point between ages 15-39
- Participants must self-report low-to-moderate psychosocial quality of life (QOL), defined as an average rating of 4 or lower on the National Institutes of Health's (NIH's) validated 2-item Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) global mental health scale (two 5-point items)
- Participants must use social media
Exclusion Criteria:
- None
Tratamiento, grupos y participación
El registro puede describir tratamientos y duración sin incluir un calendario completo. Pide al equipo las visitas, procedimientos, riesgos, costos y alternativas. Mantén tu atención habitual salvo que tu médico te indique un cambio.
- Asignación
- Asignación al azar
- Enmascaramiento
- Sin enmascaramiento
Connected advocate advice
Participants viewed five social media-based messages consisting of photographs of peers who are cancer advocates who have successfully created social connections and captions with advice for having more in person connections.
Behavioral: Connected advocate advice
Lonely advocate advice
Participants viewed five social media-based messages consisting of photographs of peers who are cancer advocates who are experiencing loneliness but still try to have social connections and captions with advice for having more in person connections.
Behavioral: Lonely advocate advice
Peer-to-peer sharing
Participants viewed five social media-based messages consisting of peer-to-peer sharing about connecting with others and captions with advice for having more in person connections.
Behavioral: Peer-to-peer sharing
Clinician advice
Participants viewed five social media-based messages consisting of photographs of clinicians and captions with advice for having more in person connections.
Behavioral: Clinician advice
Control messages
Participants were randomized to 1 of 5 message conditions.
Behavioral: Control messages
Connected advocate advice BEHAVIORAL
Participants were randomized to 1 of 5 message conditions.
Lonely advocate advice BEHAVIORAL
Participants were randomized to 1 of 5 message conditions.
Peer-to-peer sharing BEHAVIORAL
Participants were randomized to 1 of 5 message conditions
Clinician advice BEHAVIORAL
Participants were randomized to 1 of 5 message conditions.
Control messages BEHAVIORAL
Participants were randomized to 1 of 5 message conditions.
Qué evalúan los investigadores
Estas medidas indican qué se estudia. No prueban que un tratamiento funcione.
Medidas principales
Perceived Message Effectiveness (Single-Item Self-Report, 5-Point Scale)
Plazo: Baseline, Up to 1 hour
After viewing each of 5 social media posts, participants answered one item: "How much does this post make you want to connect in person with people you barely know more often?" Response options ranged from 1 (not at all) to 5 (very much); higher scores indicate greater perceived message effectiveness. Ratings were compared across experimental conditions and message types.
Medidas secundarias
Positive Affect (Single-Item Self-Report, 5-Point Scale)
Plazo: Baseline, Up to 1 hour
After viewing each of 5 social media posts, participants answered one item: "How good does viewing this post make you feel?" Response options ranged from 1 (not at all) to 5 (very much); higher scores indicate greater positive affect. Ratings were compared across experimental conditions and message types.
Perceived Social Presence (Single Item Adapted From Lazard et al., 2020; 5-Point Scale)
Plazo: Baseline, Up to 1 hour
After viewing each of 5 social media posts, participants answered one item: "When viewing this post, how much do you feel as if someone is talking to you?" Response options ranged from 1 (not at all) to 5 (very much); higher scores indicate greater perceived social presence. Ratings were compared across experimental conditions and message types.
Message Relevance (Single Item Adapted From Jensen et al., 2024; 5-Point Scale)
Plazo: Baseline, Up to 1 hour
After viewing each of 5 social media posts, participants answered one item: "How relevant is this post to you?" Response options ranged from 1 (not at all) to 5 (very much); higher scores indicate greater perceived relevance. Ratings were compared across experimental conditions and message types.
Attention (Single Item Adapted From Sutfin et al., 2019; 5-Point Scale)
Plazo: Baseline, Up to 1 hour
After viewing each of 5 social media posts, participants answered one item: "How much does this post grab your attention?" Response options ranged from 1 (not at all) to 5 (very much); higher scores indicate greater attention. Ratings were compared across experimental conditions and message types.
Perceived Authenticity (Single-Item Self-Report, 5-Point Scale)
Plazo: Baseline, Up to 1 hour
After viewing each of 5 social media posts, participants answered one item: "How much do you think this post shares a real perspective?" Response options ranged from 1 (not at all) to 5 (very much); higher scores indicate greater perceived authenticity. Ratings were compared across experimental conditions and message type.
Otras medidas
Negative Affect, Unintended Reaction (Single-Item Self-Report, 5-Point Scale)
Plazo: Baseline, Up to 1 hour
After viewing each of 5 social media posts, participants answered one item: "How bad does viewing this post make you feel?" Response options ranged from 1 (not at all) to 5 (very much); higher scores indicate greater negative affect (a less favorable reaction). Ratings were compared across experimental conditions and message types.
Reactance, Unintended Reaction (Single Item Adapted From Hall et al., 2017; 5-Point Scale)
Plazo: Baseline, Up to 1 hour
After viewing each of 5 social media posts, participants answered one item: "How much does this post annoy you?" Response options ranged from 1 (not at all) to 5 (very much); higher scores indicate greater reactance (a less favorable reaction). Ratings were compared across experimental conditions and message types.
Revisa las tablas completas y sus limitaciones en el registro oficial.
Abrir resultados oficiales ↗Centros de investigación (1)
El estado general puede diferir del estado de un centro. Confirma la disponibilidad antes de trasladarte.
1 centros
University of North Carolina at Chapel HillChapel Hill, North Carolina, United StatesEstado desconocido
Equipo y fechas
- Patrocinador principal
- UNC Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center
- Inicio del estudio
- 27 may 2025 Real
- Finalización primaria
- 23 jul 2025 Real
- Finalización del estudio
- 23 jul 2025 Real
- Primera publicación
- 10 nov 2026 Real
- Última actualización
- 10 nov 2026 Real
Contactos oficiales del estudio
No hay un contacto central indicado. Revisa los centros y el registro oficial.
Título oficial del estudio
Social Media Perceptions Among Young Adults With Cancer - Online Experiment 1
Consulta a Wellness Clinical Research
Tu mensaje va a WCR, incluso si otra organización realiza este estudio. WCR puede orientarte, pero podría no realizar este estudio, tener acceso a su equipo ni poder inscribirte.
Fuente: API v2 de ClinicalTrials.gov. Patrocinadores e investigadores envían la información. La NLM no aprueba la seguridad ni la ciencia de todos los estudios registrados. Aviso del registro.
Consultado: 12 nov 2026 · Última actualización del registro: 10 nov 2026