Aims: There is a growing body of literature exploring the types of substance‐related content and their portrayals on various social media platforms. We aimed to summarize how content related to substances is portrayed on various social media platforms.Methods: This systematic review was pre‐registered on PROSPERO (ref: CRD42021291853). A comprehensive search was conducted in the databases of PubMed, Scopus, PsycINFO and Web of Science in April 2021. Original qualitative studies published post‐2004 that included thematic and sentiment analyses of social media content on tobacco, alcohol, psychostimulant, e‐cigarette, cannabis, opiate, stimulant/amphetamine, inhalant and novel psychoactive substance were included. Social media platforms were defined as online web‐ or application‐based platforms that allowed users to generate content and interact via ‘liking’, comment or messaging features. Only studies that included summative and/or thematic content analyses of substance‐related social media content were included.Results: A total of 73 studies, which covered 15 905 182 substance‐related posts on Twitter, YouTube, Instagram, Pinterest, TikTok and Weibo, were identified. A total of 76.3% of all substance‐related content was positive in its depiction of substance use, with 20.2% of content depicting use negatively. Sentiment regarding opiate use however was commonly negative (55.5%). Most studies identified themes relating to Health, Safety and Harms (65.0%) of substance use. Themes relating to Promotions/Advertisements (63.3%), Informative content (55.0%) and Use behaviours (43.3%) were also frequently identified.Conclusions: Substance‐related content that promotes engagement with substance use or actively depicts use appears to be widely available on social media. The large public presence of this content may have concerning influences on attitudes, behaviours and risk perceptions relating to substance use, particularly among the most vulnerable and heaviest users of social media—adolescents and young adults.

Background: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic had increased population-level anxiety and had elicited panic buying behaviour across the world. The over-hoarding of toilet paper has received a lot of negative public attention. In this work, we used Twitter data to qualitatively analyse tweets related to panic buying of toilet paper during the crisis. Methods: A total of 255,171 tweets were collected. Of these 4081 met our inclusion criteria and 100 tweets were randomly selected to develop a coding scheme in the initial phase. Random samples of tweets in folds of 100 were then qualitatively analysed in the focused coding phase until saturation was met at 500 tweets analysed. Results: Five key themes emerged: (1) humour or sarcasm, (2) marketing or profiteering, (3) opinion and emotions, (4) personal experience, and (5) support or information. About half of the tweets carried negative sentiments, expressing anger or frustration towards the deficiency of toilet paper and the frantic situation of toilet paper hoarding, which were among the most influential tweets. Discussion: Panic buying of toilet paper was seen during the 2020 pandemic period with a mass amount of related content spread across social media. The spontaneous contagion of fear and panic through social media could fuel psychological reactions in midst of crises. The high level of negative social media posts regarding the toilet paper crisis acts as an emotional trigger of public anxiety and panic. Conclusions: Social media data can provide rapid infodemiology of public mental health. In a pandemic or crisis situation, real-time data could be monitored and content-analysed for authorities to promptly address public concerns.

Aim: There are concerns regarding what young people are exposed to on TikTok due to trending content promoting e-cigarette use through humour, marketing and lifestyle acceptability. Using baseline data from November 2020, we aimed to examine how much content from a sample of popular vaping videos remained accessible at 9- and 12-month follow-ups. We aimed to monitor changes in viewer engagement (using metadata) before and after the U.S. Congressional Hearing on youth protection measures on social media in October 2021. Methods: Hashtag-based keywords were used to collect the most viewed publicly available e-cigarette related videos on TikTok (N = 802) from inception to November 2020 to form a baseline. Researchers conducted a longitudinal descriptive study using this data, with 9- and 12-month follow-ups to measure changes in viewer engagement (using metadata) and content availability. Findings: Of the 802 videos from the baseline, 562 remained at the 9-month follow-up and 511 remained at the 12-month follow-up. At the 12-month follow-up, the majority of vaping-related hashtags were removed by TikTok after the Congressional Hearing. Between the baseline and 9-month follow up, views increased by 1.4% and likes increased by 4.4%. At 12-month follow-up, views had increased by 1.7% and likes by 4.2% compared to baseline data. Whilst 291 videos were no longer publicly accessible at 12-month follow-up, 39 of these were made inaccessible by the content creators. The most viewed and most liked vaping videos at baseline were still publicly available. Conclusions: Whilst the depiction type and thematic distribution of removed videos suggest that TikTok may be removing a small proportion of content that promotes the use of e-cigarettes, metadata of remaining videos indicate an increase in viewer engagement. TikTok’s removal of explicit substance-related hashtags from the platform could be a step towards preventing adolescents from being exposed to harmful behaviours and substances online. However, the platform should consider enforcing effective age restrictions on content that promotes substance use in a positive light.

Given the rise in cannabis vaping, it is important to highlight the heterogeneity in vaping different cannabis product because of the potential differences in their health risks. This study aims to estimate the trends and socio-demographic correlates of the use of various cannabis vaping products across jurisdiction with different legal status. Data from the 2018 (n = 27,169) and 2019 (n = 47,747) waves of the International Cannabis Policy Study (ICPS) were used. Respondents aged 16–65 completed web-based surveys. In 2019, proportions of past year vaping of cannabis oil, dried flower and concentrates in the overall sample were highest in U.S. jurisdictions where cannabis was legalized for non-medical use (17.4%, 6.0%, 4.9%), followed by U.S. jurisdiction where non-medical cannabis use is illegal (13.7%, 5.8%, 2.9%), and lowest in Canada (8.1%, 4.4%, 2.1%). Vaping dried flower decreased from 2019 to 2018 in U.S. legal jurisdictions and Canada, while vaping cannabis oil and concentrates increased in all jurisdictions (p < 0.001). The odds of vaping all forms of products were higher among younger respondents (16–55 years), males, respondents with some college education, and persons with low-risk perceptions on daily cannabis vaping. In both ICPS surveys (2018 and 2019), cannabis oil was the most frequently vaped products, followed by dried flower, and concentrates. Detailed measures of product forms for cannabis vaping should be considered in future surveys.

It is important to know the prevalence and source of medicinal cannabis use in the population because non-prescribed medicinal use of cannabis products places individuals at higher risk of harms. We estimated the prevalence and correlates of the use of cannabis for medicinal purposes in Australia, three years after Australians were given legal access. Cross-sectional. The 2019 Australian National Drug Strategy Household Survey. Participants were 22,015 Australians aged 14 or above. Self-reported cannabis use in the last 12 months for medicinal purposes only, both medicinal/recreational reasons, or recreationally only. Those who reported medicinal use were asked if it had been prescribed by a doctor. Prevalence estimates were weighted to the population and multinomial logistic regression examined the correlates. The prevalence of any medicinal cannabis use in the past year was 2.6%. Only 0.8% of the sample reported using cannabis solely for medicinal reasons, 95.9% of whom did not have a prescription. A self-reported diagnosis of cancer was associated with medicinal use only. Self-reported chronic pain was associated with both medicinal only and medicinal/recreational use. Medicinal cannabis use was associated with opioids use. In 2019, the prevalence of cannabis use solely for medicinal reasons remains under 1%, was more common among people with specific medical conditions, but most individuals do not have a prescription. The prevalence of self-reported medicinal cannabis use in Australia is low and there is limited use of the legal pathway for medicinal cannabis.