This study evaluated whether organizations with limited resources can feasibly partner with social media nano- and micro-influencers to promote colorectal cancer (CRC) screening and estimated the cost of that approach. The authors recruited 16 US influencers to create and post CRC screening videos on Instagram, then measured reach, engagement, and audience sentiment one month after posting. The effort produced nearly 90,000 views and a low calculated cost per view.
The project identified 16 US influencers through an online influencer marketing campaign platform. The targeted influencers were characterized as nano- and micro-influencers; specific follower thresholds for these categories were not reported in the abstract. Influencer recruitment and onboarding used written guidance and recommended CRC screening information provided by the research team.
Influencers were asked to create one video each promoting CRC screening. They received instructions to include one of four message strategies: threat, efficacy, threat and efficacy, or information only. The guidance and recommended screening information were intended to encourage theory-consistent messaging in the influencer-created content. The abstract reports that influencers were largely able to follow the written guidance and include theory-based elements in their posts.
Each influencer posted one video to Instagram Reels and Stories during June–July 2025. Engagement and reach metrics for the videos were collected one month after the posts were published. The abstract does not report additional follow-up beyond the one-month metric capture window.
Collectively, the 16 influencer videos were viewed 89,764 times. The per-influencer mean number of views was 5,610 with a standard deviation of 5,545, indicating variability in individual post performance. Reported engagement rates were high, with a mean engagement rate of 7.9% across posts. Comment sentiment was overwhelmingly positive: 96% positive, 4% neutral, and 0% negative comments. The abstract states the posts did not elicit resistance from viewers.
The study calculated a cost of $0.13 per view for the influencer campaign. The abstract provides this single unit cost estimate but does not detail the total campaign expenditure, itemized costs (for example, influencer fees versus platform or production costs), or comparisons to alternative communication channels. Further financial breakdowns were not reported in the abstract.
According to the abstract, influencers were largely able to follow the written guidance provided and to include the assigned theory-based message strategy in their posts. The study therefore suggests that with written materials and light oversight, influencers can produce content consistent with health communication objectives. The abstract does not provide detailed examples of content, fidelity assessments, or measures of exact adherence rates by message type.
The authors conclude that partnerships between public health organizations and social media influencers could expand the reach of health messages, particularly given increasing social media use among middle-aged and older adults. The campaign achieved substantial reach and a low cost-per-view, with strong positive audience sentiment and engagement.
Limitations and gaps in the abstract include the absence of data on downstream outcomes (for example, whether viewers sought screening or completed screening), details on the influencers' follower demographics, and a full cost breakdown. The abstract also does not report on longer-term sustainability, comparisons with other outreach modalities, or potential variability in effectiveness by message strategy. These details were not reported in the abstract and would require consultation of the full article for clarification.
In this feasibility study, 16 Instagram-based nano- and micro-influencers posted CRC screening videos in June–July 2025 and generated 89,764 views (mean 5,610; SD 5,545) with a calculated cost of $0.13 per view. Engagement rates were high (mean 7.9%), comment sentiment was overwhelmingly positive, and influencers generally followed the provided guidance for including theory-based content. The abstract suggests influencer partnerships may be a practical, cost-efficient method to increase the reach of cancer screening messages, while noting that additional outcome and cost-detail data were not reported in the abstract.