Abstract:<sec> <title>BACKGROUND</title> Information disclosure is a top priority for official responses to the 2019 coronavirus pandemic (COVID-19). The information published by the authorities as a response to the crisis has been a cause of great concern to the public; however, there is limited evidence of any systematic analyses of the disclosed epidemic information. This in turn has important implications for risk communication. </sec> <sec> <title>OBJECTIVE</title> This study aimed to describe and compare the officially released content regarding the local epidemic situations and analyze the characteristics of information disclosure through local transmission for both the individual and total population levels in major cities of China. </sec> <sec> <title>METHODS</title> The 31 capital cities in mainland China were enrolled in a city-level observational study. Data were retrieved from local municipalities and health commission websites as of March 18, 2020. A checklist was employed as a rapid qualitative assessment tool to analyze the information disclosure performance of each city. Descriptive analyses and data visualizations were produced to present and compare the comparative performances of the cities. </sec> <sec> <title>RESULTS</title> In total, 29 cities (93.5%) established specific COVID-19 webpages to disclose information. Among them, 12 of the city webpages were added to their corresponding municipal websites. A majority of the cities (21 of 31, 67.7%) published their first cases of infection in a timely manner on the actual day of confirmation. Regarding the information disclosures highlighted on the websites, news updates from local media or press briefings were the most prevalent (28 of 29, 96.6%), followed by epidemic surveillance (25 of 29, 86.2%) and advice for the public (25 of 29, 86.2%). Clarifications of misinformation and frequently asked questions were largely overlooked as only 2 cities provided this valuable information. The median daily update frequency of epidemic surveillance summaries was 1.2 times per day (interquartile range 1.0 to 1.3 times), and the majority of these summaries (18 of 25, 72.0%) also provided detailed information of confirmed cases. The reporting of key indicators in the epidemic surveillance summaries, as well as critical facts included in the confirmed case reports, varied substantially between cities. In general, the best performance in terms of timely reporting and the transparency of information disclosures were observed in the municipalities directly administered by the central government compared to the other cities. </sec> <sec> <title>CONCLUSIONS</title> Timely and effective efforts to disclose information related to the COVID-19 epidemic have been made in major cities of China. Continued improvements to local authority reporting will contribute to more effective public communication and efficient public health research responses. The development of protocols and the standardization of epidemic message templates—as well as the use of uniform operating procedures to provide regular information updates—should be prioritized to ensure a coordinated national response. </sec>

Fight a more contagious global epidemic-misinformation of COVID-19 (Preprint)

Analysis of misinformation during the COVID-19 outbreak in China: cultural, social and political entanglements

Fighting Against the Common Enemy of COVID-19: a Practice of Building a Community with a Shared Future for Mankind

COVID -19- Infodemic overtaking Pandemic? Time to disseminate facts over fear

Challenges in Combating COVID-19 Infodemic -- Data, Tools, and Ethics

"COVID-19 was a FIFA conspiracy #curropt": An Investigation into the Viral Spread of COVID-19 Misinformation

Strengthening scientific credibility against misinformation and disinformation: Where do we stand now?

Cross-Country Comparison of Public Awareness, Rumors, and Behavioral Responses to the COVID-19 Epidemic: Infodemiology Study

Infodemiological Study on COVID-19 Epidemic and Infodemic

Misinformation, Believability, and Vaccine Acceptance Over 40 Countries: Takeaways From the Initial Phase of The COVID-19 Infodemic

How to Fight an Infodemic: The Four Pillars of Infodemic Management

Who spread COVID-19 (mis)information online? Differential informedness, psychological mechanisms, and intervention strategies

Information disclosure during the COVID-19 epidemic in China: A city-level observational study (Preprint)

Spread and governance of pseudo-science internet rumors in major public healthy emergencies based on SEIR model: a case study of COVID-19 epidemic (Special Section: COVID-19) [Chinese]

Can Predominant Credible Information Suppress Misinformation in Crises? Empirical Studies of Tweets Related to Prevention Measures during COVID-19

Effective Infodemic Management: A Substantive Article of the Pandemic Accord

Combating Health Misinformation in Social Media: Characterization, Detection, Intervention, and Open Issues

Charting the Information and Misinformation Landscape to Characterize Misinfodemics on Social Media: COVID-19 Infodemiology Study at a Planetary Scale

The COVID-19 Infodemic: Mechanism, Impact, and Counter-Measures—A Review of Reviews

Social histories of public health misinformation and infodemics: case studies of four pandemics

Recognition of the Medical Structures in Computerized Chest Radiograph Processing