Abstract:Social networking platforms offer a wide reach for public health interventions allowing communication with broad audiences using tools that are generally free and straightforward to use and may be combined with other components, such as public health policies. We define interactive social media as activities, practices, or behaviours among communities of people who have gathered online to interactively share information, knowledge, and opinions. We aimed to assess the effectiveness of interactive social media interventions, in which adults are able to communicate directly with each other, on changing health behaviours, body functions, psychological health, well‐being, and adverse effects. Our secondary objective was to assess the effects of these interventions on the health of populations who experience health inequity as defined by PROGRESS‐Plus. We assessed whether there is evidence about PROGRESS‐Plus populations being included in studies and whether results are analysed across any of these characteristics. We searched CENTRAL, CINAHL, Embase, MEDLINE (including trial registries) and PsycINFO. We used Google, Web of Science, and relevant web sites to identify additional studies and searched reference lists of included studies. We searched for published and unpublished studies from 2001 until June 1, 2020. We did not limit results by language. We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs), controlled before‐and‐after (CBAs) and interrupted time series studies (ITSs). We included studies in which the intervention website, app, or social media platform described a goal of changing a health behaviour, or included a behaviour change technique. The social media intervention had to be delivered to adults via a commonly‐used social media platform or one that mimicked a commonly‐used platform. We included studies comparing an interactive social media intervention alone or as a component of a multi‐component intervention with either a non‐interactive social media control or an active but less‐interactive social media comparator (e.g. a moderated versus an unmoderated discussion group). Our main outcomes were health behaviours (e.g. physical activity), body function outcomes (e.g. blood glucose), psychological health outcomes (e.g. depression), well‐being, and adverse events. Our secondary outcomes were process outcomes important for behaviour change and included knowledge, attitudes, intention and motivation, perceived susceptibility, self‐efficacy, and social support. We used a pre‐tested data extraction form and collected data independently, in duplicate. Because we aimed to assess broad outcomes, we extracted only one outcome per main and secondary outcome categories prioritised by those that were the primary outcome as reported by the study authors, used in a sample size calculation, and patient‐important. We included 88 studies (871,378 participants), of which 84 were RCTs, three were CBAs and one was an ITS. The majority of the studies were conducted in the USA (54%). In total, 86% were conducted in high‐income countries and the remaining 14% in upper middle‐income countries. The most commonly used social media platform was Facebook (39%) with few studies utilising other platforms such as WeChat, Twitter, WhatsApp, and Google Hangouts. Many studies (48%) used web‐based communities or apps that mimic functions of these well‐known social media platforms. We compared studies assessing interactive social media interventions with non‐interactive social media interventions, which included paper‐based or in‐person interventions or no intervention. We only reported the RCT results in our 'Summary of findings' table. We found a range of effects on health behaviours, such as breastfeeding, condom use, diet quality, medication adherence, medical screening and testing, physical activity, tobacco use, and vaccination. For example, these interventions may increase physical activity and medical screening tests but there was little to no effect for other health behaviours, such as improved diet or reduced tobacco use (20,139 participants in 54 RCTs). For body function outcomes, interactive social media interventions may result in small but important positive effects, such as a small but important positive effect on weight loss and a small but important reduction in resting heart rate (4521 participants in 30 RCTs). Interactive social media may improve overall well‐being (standardised mean difference (SMD) 0.46, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.14 to 0.79, moderate effect, low‐certainty evidence) demonstrated by an increase of 3.77 points on a general well‐being scale (from 1.15 to 6.48 points higher) where scores range from 14 to 70 (3792 participants in 16 studies). We found no difference in effect on psychological outcomes (depression and distress) representing a difference of 0.1 points on a standard scale in which scores range from 0 to 63 points (SMD ‐0.01, 95% -Abstract Truncated-

Social Media Interventions for Patients and Public: Opportunities and Challenges for the Urology Community

Harnessing Social Media to Enhance Nephrology Academia

Social media and urology: The good, the bad and the ugly

Emerging Educational and Networking Platforms in Interventional Cardiology: Expanding Beyond Traditional Social Media

Internet and social media use among patients with colorectal diseases (ISMAEL): a nationwide survey

Live videos shared on social media during urological conferences are increasing: Time to reflect on advantages and potential harms. An ESUT-YAU study

Behavioural interventions delivered through interactive social media for health behaviour change, health outcomes, and health equity in the adult population.

Using social media for patient care, research, and professional development: A North American society of pediatric gastroenterology, hepatology, and nutrition position paper

Social media: a review and tutorial of applications in medicine and health care

Exploring the Residents' Perspective on Smart learning Modalities and Contents for Virtual Urology Education: Lesson Learned During the COVID-19 Pandemic

Health-Related Internet Use Among New Urology Clinic Patients

Spanish adaptation of the recommendations for the appropriate use of social networks in urology of the European Association of Urology

Co-creating an empowering health education intervention for urological cancer patients

Use of social media for academic and professional purposes by gynecologic oncologists

The evolution of social media in nephrology education: A mini-review

(427) Unveiling Unmet Needs: A User-Centered Approach To A Digital Intervention For Women Affected By Gynecological Conditions With Sexual Distress

Social Media and Web Presence for Patients and Professionals: Evolving Trends and Implications for Practice

Health Social Media and Patient-Centered Care: Buzz or Evidence? Findings from the Section "Education and Consumer Health Informatics" of the 2015 Edition of the IMIA Yearbook

Uro-oncology in the era of social distancing: the principles of patient-centered online consultations during the COVID-19 pandemic

Social media and its impact on health care

Social networks - help or hindrance in patient care