Health Misinformation on Social Media: A Literature Review

Health misinformation on social media is considered as a major public concern. This study evaluates the current state of this issue by conducting a systematic literature review. Based on a stepwise literature search and selection procedure, we have identified 21 articles relevant to the topic of health misinformation on social media. We find that health misinformation on social media is a new and emerging topic in multiple disciplines. One very important insight of this review is that most studies are theoretical and exploratory in nature. There is only a small number of studies have solid theoretical foundations. Finally, we discuss the implication of the literature review for future research

What is health information quality? Ethical dimension and perception by users

Introduction. The popularity of seeking health information online makes information quality (IQ) a public health issue. The present study aims at building a theoretical framework of health information quality (HIQ) that can be applied to websites and defines which IQ criteria are important for a website to be trustworthy and meet users’ expectations. Methods. We have identified a list of HIQ criteria from existing tools and assessment criteria and elaborated them into a questionnaire that was promoted via social media and mainly the University. Responses (329) were used to rank the different criteria for their importance in trusting a website and to identify patterns of criteria using hierarchical cluster analysis. Results. HIQ criteria were organized in five dimensions based on previous theoretical frameworks as well as on how they cluster together in the questionnaire response. We could identify a top-ranking dimension (scientific completeness) that describes what the user is expecting to know from the websites (in particular: description of symptoms, treatments, side effects). Cluster analysis also identified a number of criteria borrowed from existing tools for assessing HIQ that could be subsumed to a broad “ethical” dimension (such as conflict of interests, privacy, advertising policies) that were, in general, ranked of low importance by the participants. Subgroup analysis revealed significant differences in the importance assigned to the various criteria based on gender, nationality and whether or not of a biomedical educational background. Conclusions. We identified criteria of HIQ and organized them in dimensions. We observed that ethical criteria, while regarded highly in the academic and medical environment, are not considered highly by the public

Unmasked in the Plandemic: Misinformation during the novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic

This paper explores the misinformation phenomena surrounding COVID-19 on social media platforms and its potential impact on the trajectory of the COVID-19 pandemic in the US. It defines the terms misinformation and disinformation and links these to recent political phenomena of “fake news” and political disinformation campaigns. It characterizes the sources of misinformation online and seeks to analyze the psycho-social and cognitive mechanisms of online misinformation spread such as source and message credibility through research on vaccine hesitancy and misinformation online during other global pandemics and resurging epidemics. Network analysis establishes that misinformation online spreads farther and faster than factual information on social media platforms. Relationships between misinformation and impact on health are explored utilizing research based in agent-based modeling techniques. It argues for the quantification and characterization of COVID-19 online misinformation in order to develop targeted interventions to vulnerable and at-risk groups using informed risk communication practices across all levels of government to mitigate disparities in COVID-19 case rates and transmission. Keywords: SARS-CoV-19; COVID-19; Misinformation; Disinformation; Credibility; Network Analysis; Risk Communication; Crisis Communication; Health Communicatio

What Presentation of Search Engine Results Do Health Information Searchers Prefer?

A study of a sample of online health information searchers was conducted to see what their preferences are with respect to four different display styles for search engine results on health topics. Screen shots of search result display screens were presented to the participants via a Qualtrics (www.qualtrics.com) online survey. The other display types were Display 1: Google standard display, Display 2: Google enhanced with faceted browsable categories, Display 3: Google enhanced with a word cloud for each search result, and Display 4: Google enhanced with an overview word cloud for collection of search results. For each search task, participants were asked to rate the search engine results displays for quality indicators, using Likert-type item rating scales. At the end, in three concluding questions, the participants were asked to choose the display(s) that were best at meeting three specific criteria, based on overall impressions. The evaluations by the participants suggest that the standard Google search results display and the Google screen enhanced with faceted browsable categories were favored over the other two display types.Master of Science in Information Scienc