Interventions to mitigate COVID-19 misinformation: protocol for a scoping review

Background The duration and impact of the COVID-19 pandemic depends in a large part on individual and societal actions which is influenced by the quality and salience of the information to which they are exposed. Unfortunately, COVID-19 misinformation has proliferated. To date, no systematic efforts have been made to evaluate interventions that mitigate COVID-19-related misinformation. We plan to conduct a scoping review that seeks to fill several of the gaps in the current knowledge of interventions that mitigate COVID-19-related misinformation. Methods A scoping review focusing on interventions that mitigate COVID-19 misinformation will be conducted. We will search (from January 2020 onwards) MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Web of Science Core Collection, Africa-Wide Information, Global Health, WHO Global Literature on Coronavirus Disease Database, WHO Global Index Medicus, and Sociological Abstracts. Gray literature will be identified using Disaster Lit, Google Scholar, Open Science Framework, governmental websites, and preprint servers (e.g., EuropePMC, PsyArXiv, MedRxiv, JMIR Preprints). Study selection will conform to Joanna Briggs Institute Reviewers’ Manual 2020 Methodology for JBI Scoping Reviews. Only English language, original studies will be considered for inclusion. Two reviewers will independently screen all citations, full-text articles, and abstract data. A narrative summary of findings will be conducted. Data analysis will involve quantitative (e.g., frequencies) and qualitative (e.g., content and thematic analysis) methods. Discussion Original research is urgently needed to design interventions to mitigate COVID-19 misinformation. The planned scoping review will help to address this gap. Systematic review registrations Systematic Review Registration: Open Science Framework (osf/io/etw9d)

Interventions to Mitigate COVID-19 Misinformation: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

The duration and impact of the COVID-19 pandemic depends largely on individual and societal actions which are influenced by the quality and salience of the information to which they are exposed. Unfortunately, COVID-19 misinformation has proliferated. Despite growing attempts to mitigate COVID-19 misinformation, there is still uncertainty regarding the best way to ameliorate the impact of COVID-19 misinformation. To address this gap, the current study uses a meta-analysis to evaluate the relative impact of interventions designed to mitigate COVID-19-related misinformation. We searched multiple databases and gray literature from January 2020 to September 2021. The primary outcome was COVID-19 misinformation belief. We examined study quality and meta-analysis was used to pool data with similar interventions and outcomes. 16 studies were analyzed in the meta-analysis, including data from 33378 individuals. The mean effect size of interventions to mitigate COVID-19 misinformation was positive, but not statistically significant [d = 2.018, 95% CI (-0.14, 4.18), p = .065, k = 16]. We found evidence of publication bias. Interventions were more effective in cases where participants were involved with the topic, and where text-only mitigation was used. The limited focus on non-U.S. studies and marginalized populations is concerning given the greater COVID-19 mortality burden on vulnerable communities globally. The findings of this meta-analysis describe the current state of the literature and prescribe specific recommendations to better address the proliferation of COVID-19 misinformation, providing insights helpful to mitigating pandemic outcomes

Crowdsourcing hypothesis tests: Making transparent how design choices shape research results

To what extent are research results influenced by subjective decisions that scientists make as they design studies? Fifteen research teams independently designed studies to answer fiveoriginal research questions related to moral judgments, negotiations, and implicit cognition. Participants from two separate large samples (total N > 15,000) were then randomly assigned to complete one version of each study. Effect sizes varied dramatically across different sets of materials designed to test the same hypothesis: materials from different teams renderedstatistically significant effects in opposite directions for four out of five hypotheses, with the narrowest range in estimates being d = -0.37 to +0.26. Meta-analysis and a Bayesian perspective on the results revealed overall support for two hypotheses, and a lack of support for three hypotheses. Overall, practically none of the variability in effect sizes was attributable to the skill of the research team in designing materials, while considerable variability was attributable to the hypothesis being tested. In a forecasting survey, predictions of other scientists were significantly correlated with study results, both across and within hypotheses. Crowdsourced testing of research hypotheses helps reveal the true consistency of empirical support for a scientific claim.</div

Abstract TP379: Excessive Daytime Sleepiness in Stroke Survivors: Evidence From an Integrative Literature Review

Background and Purpose: Excessive daytime sleepiness (EDS) is a prevalent symptom among stroke survivors. An understanding and accurate diagnosis of EDS is important, not only because EDS has been identified as an independent risk factor for stroke, but also because EDS may reduce stroke survivors’ quality of life, cognitive functioning and daytime functional performance. The lack of a universally accepted definition of EDS makes it difficult to measure and synthesize research. The purpose of this integrative review is to describe post-stroke EDS; to ascertain conceptual and operational definitions of EDS; to identify factors that contribute to EDS in stroke survivors; and to explore consequences of EDS in stroke survivors. Methods: Guided by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, an integrative review of the literature was conducted. We searched the following databases: PubMed, MEDLINE (OvidSP 1946 - April, Week 2, 2015), Embase (OvidSP 1974 - March, Week 1, 2015) and PsycINFO (OvidSP 1967 - April, Week 2, 2015), which yielded 340 articles and 27 articles met inclusion criteria. Results: The evidence suggests EDS is a multidimensional construct that is operationalized with subjective and objective measures. Choosing measures that can quantify both the objective and subjective components is useful to gain a comprehensive understanding of EDS. The antecedents of EDS are sub-types of stroke, sleep disordered breathing, Reversed Robin Hood Syndrome and depression. Consequences of EDS in stroke are serious and negative. A potential framework of post-stroke EDS is proposed and may be of use in clinical practice and in research to identify valid quantifying methods for EDS as well as to prevent harmful outcomes in stroke survivors. Conclusion: EDS is frequently experienced after stroke and may not always be caused by SDB. Healthcare providers and sleep specialists can seek to influence stroke survivors’ functional, neurological, and health-related outcomes through interventions that avoid EDS, depressive symptoms or SDB. Whenever SDB is suspected in stroke survivors, choosing both a subjective and objective evaluation of sleep may be indicated. </jats:p

Security analysis and improvements of XOR arbitrated quantum signature-based GHZ state

Recently, Zheng et al. presented a novel signature protocol with arbitrator based on XOR encryption and GHZ state. Unfortunately, their protocol lacks security. Firstly, a quantum adversary can forge their signature based on the received information. On the other hand, their protocol is vulnerable for the adversary’s repudiation attack. Then, we bring about improvements on its security, efficiency and practicality. The improved protocol not only prevents the security defects of the old protocol, but also has better computation efficiency. On the other hand, our protocol is mainly used to sign the classical messages, which are widely used in the current network. </jats:p

Prevalence of fusB in Staphylococcus aureus clinical isolates

Fusidic acid (FA) resistance in Staphylococcus aureus markedly varied among different regions. Few data for FA resistance are available in China. In this study, FA susceptibility testing was performed, and the prevalence of fusB and fusC in 116 clinical isolates of S. aureus was investigated by PCR. Mutations in fusA were also determined by sequencing of PCR products. Molecular typing of fusB-positive strains was based on multilocus sequence typing (MLST), spa typing and pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE). A DNA fragment flanking fusB was sequenced. Transformation experiments were carried out in fusB-positive S. aureus. Of 116 S. aureus including 19 meticillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA) and 97 meticillin-susceptible S. aureus (MSSA), four (3.5 %) were resistant to FA with MICs of 6–12 µg ml−1, including one MRSA from blood and three MSSA from wound exudates. All four FA-resistant isolates were found to be fusB gene positive. Three FA-resistant MSSA strains had the same MLST profile of ST630 and spa type of t377, whilst the MRSA strain belonged to ST630-t4549. Only one PFGE pattern was recognized for these four strains. No fusC and fusA mutations were detected in any of the isolates. FA resistance in fusB-positive clinical isolates could be transferred to S. aureus RN4220. The fusB gene was located in a transposon-like element, which had 99 % identity with that found in pUB101. In conclusion, the FA resistance rate is low in S. aureus, and the fusB gene is responsible for the resistance.</jats:p