As digital communication becomes essential, social media is becoming an integral part of higher education and libraries are using platforms such as Facebook, X (formerly Twitter), Instagram and YouTube to engage users and promote resources (Collins & Quan-Haase 2012). Although there is a growing number of studies on the integration of social media into libraries, there are few studies on the best practices for social media and few structured strategies for using social media, and the literature is not well connected (Collins & Quan-Haase 2012). This systematic review addresses the research question: ‘How can social media be effectively utilised in academic libraries to enhance user engagement and improve service delivery?’ (Pasipamire 2025:185).

Social media is an essential tool for academic libraries and has transformed the way in which libraries communicate with and engage their users by providing immediate access to resources and disseminating information (Chugh & Ruhi 2018; Cowell 2017; Dhanavandan 2023). Social media enable libraries to market their services, attract users and engage communities, fostering innovation and responsiveness to digital changes, promoting research support and information literacy education and improving access to digital resources (Dhanavandan 2023; Gohel 2021; Miyanda Chitumbo 2023). Platforms such as Facebook and Twitter can be used for sharing resources and collaborating and networking with organisations and professionals, making strategic integration a necessity to be relevant in the digital environment, to improve the provision of services and create interactive learning environments through enhanced technological integration (Lessick 2015). Real-time communication through chatbots and messaging platforms has transformed user interaction, with AI-powered systems demonstrating enhanced operational efficiency (Kasaraneni 2022).

User engagement in academic libraries refers to the quality and depth of users’ interaction with library services, encompassing participation, satisfaction and sustained connection. Within higher education, engagement supports learning outcomes and continued use of scholarly resources (Paul, Chauhan & Pal 2024; Young & Rossmann 2015). It is widely viewed as a multidimensional construct incorporating behavioural, cognitive, emotional and social aspects (Harrison et al. 2017; Lohia et al. 2025; Tagarda et al. 2025). Behavioural engagement involves visible actions such as attending events or using online platforms (Dyamanagoudr et al. 2025), while cognitive engagement reflects focused effort and information-seeking strategies (Lohia et al. 2025). Emotional engagement captures users’ satisfaction and sense of belonging and social engagement denotes collaboration and community identification through sharing and dialogue (Collins & Quan-Haase 2012). Quantitative indicators such as usage analytics and social-media metrics offer behavioural insight (Chugh & Ruhi 2018), whereas qualitative methods reveal motivation and meaning (Young & Rossmann 2015). This review adopts a context-dependent, multidimensional understanding of engagement, combining behavioural and qualitative evidence to ensure methodological rigour and ethical interpretation (Kumar & Chidambaram 2025; Paul et al. 2024).

This systematic review fills a significant gap in the body of research in the field of library and information science, which has seen individual case studies and surveys document the adoption of social media within academic libraries but lacks the synthesis of evidence on effective strategies, persistent barriers and context-specific best practices that are needed to translate them into actionable strategies (Burkhardt 2010; Collins & Quan-Haase 2012).

This systematic review, which summarises the global evidence, clarifies how social media integration enhances user interaction, communication and resource accessibility in higher education and pinpoints the institutional factors that either facilitate or impede successful implementation.

The use of social media by academic libraries for communication, service promotion and user engagement has been extensively studied (Burkhardt 2010; Chugh & Ruhi 2018; Collins & Quan-Haase 2012; Gohel 2021); existing studies are scattered, provide little cumulative insight into patterns of effectiveness or long-term outcomes and primarily rely on descriptive analysis such as reporting platform use, frequency or perceived benefits, rather than systematically comparing results across contexts (Chiparausha & Chigwada 2019; Kumar & Kumar 2024; Ndlangamandla & Chisenga 2023; Oloo & Luyombya 2023). There is also a lack of consistency in methodology, with many studies based on surveys and self-reported perceptions rather than behaviour or outcome-based measures (Dhanavandan 2023; Howard et al. 2018; King 2015). Finally, although the literature reflects global engagement, its geographic distribution is inconsistent, evidenced by the absence of studies from Latin America and the limited number from Europe and the Middle East (Jones & Harvey 2019). Collectively, these drawbacks indicate the need for a methodical synthesis that can compile worldwide research and pinpoint context-sensitive tactics for successful social media integration in higher education libraries.

The following are the main goals of this systematic review:

As established in the conference article, ‘this systematic review follows PRISMA guidelines to ensure a structured and transparent research process’ (Moher et al. 2009; Pasipamire 2025:186), using the 27-point PRISMA checklist and the four-step flow chart to guide the selection of studies.

Building on the conference article (Pasipamire 2025), this expanded systematic review examines how academic libraries leverage social media platforms to enhance service delivery and strengthen user engagement. Following the methodological approach established in the conference article, ‘the PICO methodology (Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome) was utilised to ensure that the systematic review remains focused and adheres to sound research practices’ (Pasipamire 2025:186). Originally developed by Richardson et al. (1995) for evidence-based clinical decision-making, this review used a framework adapted from the traditional PICO approach of systematic reviews (Higgins et al. 2019) with some modifications to account for the exploratory nature of social media adoption in academic libraries: Intervention (I) was replaced with Phenomenon of Interest (PI) to capture the integration and application of social media platforms in library services, and the traditional Comparison (C) was replaced with Context (C) to reflect the situational and institutional contexts of higher education library services:

This framework guided the development of inclusion criteria and data extraction protocols, ensuring consistency in identifying studies that address the adoption, implementation and outcomes of social media in academic library contexts.

This review explored the use of social media in higher education library services. Searches of the literature were performed in Academic Search Complete, Education Resources Information Center (ERIC), Google Scholar, Web of Science and Scopus using the PICO framework and keywords such as social media, academic libraries, library services, engagement and technology integration and using Boolean operators for each database structure (Table 1).

Table 2 shows the inclusion and exclusion criteria established for the systematic review to ensure the selection of relevant and high-quality studies.

Based on these criteria, the review excluded irrelevant or poor-quality articles, ensuring a reliable and methodologically sound selection, in line with current academic library practice.

The study selection process included a search of 180 publications on social media integration in library services, which was reduced to 150 unique records after removing duplicates, with titles and abstracts screened, 45 of which were evaluated for full text, with 20 included in the analysis. Consistent with the conference article (Pasipamire 2025), this review employs PRISMA guidelines to ensure methodological rigour. Study quality was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool, which classifies studies as low, moderate or high risk of bias based on selection methods, reporting clarity and conflicts of interest and excluded high-risk studies. The PRISMA flow diagram (Figure 1) visually maps this selection pathway, showing the number of records identified, screened, included and excluded at each phase to ensure methodological transparency and reproducibility.

The extraction form captured five key dimensions: (1) study characteristics (authors, year, location, methodology, sample); (2) social media platforms examined; (3) implementation characteristics (purpose, posting frequency, policies, resources); (4) outcomes and impacts (engagement metrics, satisfaction, barriers, success factors) and (5) quality indicators (sampling, measurements, limitations, conflicts of interest). Two reviewers independently extracted data from all 20 studies, resolving discrepancies through consensus, following established systematic review methodology (Roqué et al. 2020).

The quality of the included studies was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool (Higgins et al. 2019), a tool that evaluates potential bias in six domains: selection, performance, detection, attrition, reporting and other sources, rated as low, moderate or high risk based on criteria such as sampling methods, consistency of interventions, reliability of measurements, completeness of data, transparency in reporting and disclosure of conflicts of interest (Nejadghaderi, Balibegloo & Rezaei 2024).

This article followed all ethical standards for research without direct contact with human or animal subjects.

This systematic review included 20 studies employing varied methodological approaches: surveys (n = 11), content analysis (n = 1), case studies (n = 3), phenomenological research (n = 1), literature reviews (n = 3) and mixed-methods (n = 1), conducted between 2010 and 2024.

The findings have several implications for library practitioners and decision-makers based on evidence. Libraries providing formal staff training achieved 40% higher engagement than those with ad hoc approaches, demonstrating that professional development is essential for success.

Policy frameworks for content approval, response protocols, privacy and staff authorisation are important; libraries without them have irregular posting and are vulnerable when staff leave. Content analysis indicates overreliance on announcements and not enough dialogue; strategic, user-focused content, such as multimedia posts, interactive polls and responsive dialogue, is more effective. Libraries should select platforms based on the behaviour of users rather than general popularity, as platforms already embedded in user communication patterns work best. Cross-departmental partnerships increased reach and established libraries as core campus resources, and institutional support through dedicated budgets, staff time and management engagement facilitated sustained strategies. Even less use of analytics represents a lost opportunity; libraries should conduct regular content audits and systematically record metrics.

This review has several methodological limitations. The search was limited to five databases and excluded grey literature, potentially missing regional studies and practitioner reports. Geographic coverage was uneven, with 40% of studies from Africa but none from Latin America. Inconsistent outcome measures across studies precluded meta-analysis, and only one study analysed actual social media posts rather than self-reported perceptions. Finally, narrative synthesis required subjective grouping decisions that may have influenced interpretation.

This review identifies three critical research gaps requiring scholarly attention:

This systematic review synthesised evidence from 20 peer-reviewed studies across five continents (2010–2025), demonstrating that social media platforms (Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, WhatsApp, YouTube) expand communication channels, increase resource awareness and enable timelier interactions when used strategically. However, effectiveness is highly context dependent: North American and European libraries benefited from strong infrastructure, while resource-constrained African and Asian libraries demonstrated innovative mobile-first solutions. Three key barriers emerged: inadequate staff training, policy gaps (only 30% of Southern African libraries had formal frameworks) and insufficient institutional support leading to inconsistent implementation. Crucially, content analysis revealed that 85% of library tweets were one-way broadcasts rather than interactive dialogue, indicating a disparity between platform adoption and communication transformation. Successful strategies combined strategic platform selection aligned with user behaviour, multimedia content, two-way communication, cross-departmental collaboration and mobile accessibility, with libraries implementing these elements achieving sustained engagement and measurable improvements.

Based on the synthesised evidence, this review offers the following recommendations for library practitioners, administrators and policymakers:

Methodologically, this systematic review advances library and information science scholarship by applying PRISMA guidelines with adapted Cochrane criteria, setting evaluation standards for non-experimental library research. Geographically, the significant African evidence (40% of studies) challenges the North American and European dominance in previous syntheses, showing that infrastructure constraints influence adoption patterns and proving that best practices need to be adapted to context. The review analyses conflicting evidence by examining discrepancies between self-reported engagement claims and objective content analysis (Al-Daihani & AlAwadhi 2015) and warns against overreliance on survey data. It bridges theoretical concepts such as platform affordances, institutional readiness with practical implementation evidence, moving beyond advocacy to specify how libraries can implement effective strategies in the face of common constraints. Finally, it documents critical evidence gaps such as the absence of longitudinal studies, experimental designs and systematic content analyses, plus underrepresented regions (Latin America, broader Middle East, Europe) requiring additional scholarship. These contributions provide both a research roadmap and practical guidance for library practitioners to enhance digital engagement.