Medical misinformation on social media—are the platforms equipped to be the judge?

Chris Stokel-Walker,freelance journalist,

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.p2987

2024-02-06

BMJ

Abstract:Misinformation is rife in the age of YouTube, Instagram, and TikTok. When social media is full of “experts,” who judges what is right and what is wrong? Chris Stokel-Walker reports

medicine, general & internal

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

Medical and Health-Related Misinformation on Social Media: Bibliometric Study of the Scientific Literature

Andy Wai Kan Yeung,Anela Tosevska,Elisabeth Klager,Fabian Eibensteiner,Christos Tsagkaris,Emil D Parvanov,Faisal A Nawaz,Sabine Völkl-Kernstock,Eva Schaden,Maria Kletecka-Pulker,Harald Willschke,Atanas G Atanasov

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2196/28152

2022-01-25

Abstract:Background: Social media has been extensively used for the communication of health-related information and consecutively for the potential spread of medical misinformation. Conventional systematic reviews have been published on this topic to identify original articles and to summarize their methodological approaches and themes. A bibliometric study could complement their findings, for instance, by evaluating the geographical distribution of the publications and determining if they were well cited and disseminated in high-impact journals. Objective: The aim of this study was to perform a bibliometric analysis of the current literature to discover the prevalent trends and topics related to medical misinformation on social media. Methods: The Web of Science Core Collection electronic database was accessed to identify relevant papers with the following search string: ALL=(misinformati* OR "wrong informati*" OR disinformati* OR "misleading informati*" OR "fake news*") AND ALL=(medic* OR illness* OR disease* OR health* OR pharma* OR drug* OR therap*) AND ALL=("social media*" OR Facebook* OR Twitter* OR Instagram* OR YouTube* OR Weibo* OR Whatsapp* OR Reddit* OR TikTok* OR WeChat*). Full records were exported to a bibliometric software, VOSviewer, to link bibliographic information with citation data. Term and keyword maps were created to illustrate recurring terms and keywords. Results: Based on an analysis of 529 papers on medical and health-related misinformation on social media, we found that the most popularly investigated social media platforms were Twitter (n=90), YouTube (n=67), and Facebook (n=57). Articles targeting these 3 platforms had higher citations per paper (>13.7) than articles covering other social media platforms (Instagram, Weibo, WhatsApp, Reddit, and WeChat; citations per paper <8.7). Moreover, social media platform-specific papers accounted for 44.1% (233/529) of all identified publications. Investigations on these platforms had different foci. Twitter-based research explored cyberchondria and hypochondriasis, YouTube-based research explored tobacco smoking, and Facebook-based research studied vaccine hesitancy related to autism. COVID-19 was a common topic investigated across all platforms. Overall, the United States contributed to half of all identified papers, and 80% of the top 10 most productive institutions were based in this country. The identified papers were mostly published in journals of the categories public environmental and occupational health, communication, health care sciences services, medical informatics, and medicine general internal, with the top journal being the Journal of Medical Internet Research. Conclusions: There is a significant platform-specific topic preference for social media investigations on medical misinformation. With a large population of internet users from China, it may be reasonably expected that Weibo, WeChat, and TikTok (and its Chinese version Douyin) would be more investigated in future studies. Currently, these platforms present research gaps that leave their usage and information dissemination warranting further evaluation. Future studies should also include social platforms targeting non-English users to provide a wider global perspective.
Medical misinformation in social media: Representations of gastrointestinal disorders on a short video platform

Matthew T Bell,Alicia Stephan,Nicholas Cumpian,Hawwa Alao,Pradeep R Atla,Neetika Srivastava,Wayne M Fleischman,Viktor E Eysselein,Sofiya Reicher

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/00178969241288956

2024-10-09

Health Education Journal

Abstract:Health Education Journal, Ahead of Print. Background and Objectives:Short video platforms have become one of the most common methods for disseminating medical information on social media. We analysed gastrointestinal (GI)-related content on TikTok, focusing on the creators' background, patterns of content utilisation and overall content quality and understandability, using validated metrics to quantify the degree of misinformation.Methods:Twelve hashtags related to common GI conditions on TikTok and the 20 most engaging posts associated with each hashtag were selected for review. The 'most engaging' status was determined by the application's internal algorithm. Six GI board-certified physicians evaluated the videos using two validated instruments: DISCERN quality criteria and Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool (PEMAT-A/V) survey.Results:In total, 253 videos were reviewed with 18.6 billion likes, 191,000 comments, 935,000 saves and 927,000 shares. IBS hashtag had the greatest number of views (2.2 billion), while videos on haemorrhoids had the most likes (4.3 million), comments (59,000) and shares (288,000). Most videos 177/253 (70%) were created by non-healthcare workers. The median video quality was 2/5 on DISCERN Likert-type scale with 23/75 DISCERN score. Of 186 videos, 114 (61.3%) were rated 'very poor'; 58/186 (31.2%) 'poor', 13/186 (7%) 'fair' and only one video (0.5%) was rated 'excellent' on DISCERN grading system. The median PEMAT-A/V scores were 7/12 (73.9%) for understandability and 1/3 (33.3%) for actionability.Conclusion:Our study highlights significant public interest in common GI disorders. However, most posts lacked substantive information and did not have verifiable sources.

public, environmental & occupational health,education & educational research
Cancer misinformation on social media

Stacy Loeb,Aisha T. Langford,Marie A. Bragg,Robert Sherman,June M. Chan

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3322/caac.21857

2024-06-20

CA A Cancer Journal for Clinicians

Abstract:Social media is widely used globally by patients, families of patients, health professionals, scientists, and other stakeholders who seek and share information related to cancer. Despite many benefits of social media for cancer care and research, there is also a substantial risk of exposure to misinformation, or inaccurate information about cancer. Types of misinformation vary from inaccurate information about cancer risk factors or unproven treatment options to conspiracy theories and public relations articles or advertisements appearing as reliable medical content. Many characteristics of social media networks—such as their extensive use and the relative ease it allows to share information quickly—facilitate the spread of misinformation. Research shows that inaccurate and misleading health‐related posts on social media often get more views and engagement (e.g., likes, shares) from users compared with accurate information. Exposure to misinformation can have downstream implications for health‐related attitudes and behaviors. However, combatting misinformation is a complex process that requires engagement from media platforms, scientific and health experts, governmental organizations, and the general public. Cancer experts, for example, should actively combat misinformation in real time and should disseminate evidence‐based content on social media. Health professionals should give information prescriptions to patients and families and support health literacy. Patients and families should vet the quality of cancer information before acting upon it (e.g., by using publicly available checklists) and seek recommended resources from health care providers and trusted organizations. Future multidisciplinary research is needed to identify optimal ways of building resilience and combating misinformation across social media.

oncology
Systematic Literature Review on the Spread of Health-related Misinformation on Social Media

Yuxi Wang,Martin McKee,Aleksandra Torbica,David Stuckler

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2019.112552

Abstract:Contemporary commentators describe the current period as "an era of fake news" in which misinformation, generated intentionally or unintentionally, spreads rapidly. Although affecting all areas of life, it poses particular problems in the health arena, where it can delay or prevent effective care, in some cases threatening the lives of individuals. While examples of the rapid spread of misinformation date back to the earliest days of scientific medicine, the internet, by allowing instantaneous communication and powerful amplification has brought about a quantum change. In democracies where ideas compete in the marketplace for attention, accurate scientific information, which may be difficult to comprehend and even dull, is easily crowded out by sensationalized news. In order to uncover the current evidence and better understand the mechanism of misinformation spread, we report a systematic review of the nature and potential drivers of health-related misinformation. We searched PubMed, Cochrane, Web of Science, Scopus and Google databases to identify relevant methodological and empirical articles published between 2012 and 2018. A total of 57 articles were included for full-text analysis. Overall, we observe an increasing trend in published articles on health-related misinformation and the role of social media in its propagation. The most extensively studied topics involving misinformation relate to vaccination, Ebola and Zika Virus, although others, such as nutrition, cancer, fluoridation of water and smoking also featured. Studies adopted theoretical frameworks from psychology and network science, while co-citation analysis revealed potential for greater collaboration across fields. Most studies employed content analysis, social network analysis or experiments, drawing on disparate disciplinary paradigms. Future research should examine susceptibility of different sociodemographic groups to misinformation and understand the role of belief systems on the intention to spread misinformation. Further interdisciplinary research is also warranted to identify effective and tailored interventions to counter the spread of health-related misinformation online.
YouTube COVID-19 Vaccine Misinformation on Twitter: Platform Interactions and Moderation Blind Spots

David S. Axelrod,Brian P. Harper,John C. Paolillo

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2208.13000

2022-08-27

Abstract:While most social media companies have attempted to address the challenge of COVID-19 misinformation, the success of those policies is difficult to assess, especially when focusing on individual platforms. This study explores the relationship between Twitter and YouTube in spreading COVID-19 vaccine-related misinformation through a mixed-methods approach to analyzing a collection of tweets in 2021 sharing YouTube videos where those Twitter accounts had also linked to deleted YouTube videos. Principal components, cluster and network analyses are used to group the videos and tweets into interpretable groups by shared tweet dates, terms and sharing patterns; content analysis is employed to assess the orientation of tweets and videos to COVID-19 messages. From this we observe that a preponderance of anti-vaccine messaging remains among users who previously shared suspect information, in which a dissident political framing dominates, and which suggests moderation policy inefficacy where the platforms interact.

Social and Information Networks,Computers and Society
Unveiling misinformation on YouTube: examining the content of COVID-19 vaccination misinformation videos in Switzerland

Edda Humprecht,Sabrina Heike Kessler

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fcomm.2024.1250024

2024-03-01

Frontiers in Communication

Abstract:Social media platforms like YouTube can exacerbate the challenge of ensuring public adherence to health advisories during crises such as the COVID-19 pandemic, primarily due to the spread of misinformation. This study delves into the propagation of antivaccination sentiment on YouTube in Switzerland, examining how different forms of misinformation contribute to this phenomenon. Through content analysis of 450 German- and French-language YouTube videos, we investigated the prevalence and characteristics of completely and partially false information regarding COVID-19 vaccination within the Swiss context. Our findings show that completely false videos were more prevalent, often embedded with conspiracy theories and skepticism toward authorities. Notably, over one-third of the videos featured partially false information that masquerades as scientifically substantiated, associated with higher view counts and greater user engagement. Videos reaching the widest audiences were marked by strategies of commercialization and emotionalization. The study highlights the insidious nature of partially false information in Switzerland and its potential for greater impact due to its seemingly credible presentation. These findings underscore the need for a multifaceted response to misinformation, including enhancing digital literacy among the public, promoting accurate content creation, and fostering collaborations between health authorities and social media platforms to ensure that evidence-based information is prominently featured and accessible. Addressing the subtleties of misinformation is critical for fostering informed public behavior and decision-making during health emergencies.
COVID-19 Misinformation and Disinformation on Social Networks -- The Limits of Veritistic Countermeasures

Andrew Buzzell

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2008.00784

2020-08-03

Abstract:The COVID-19 pandemic has been the subject of a vast amount of misinformation, particularly in digital information environments, and major social media platforms recently publicized some of the countermeasures they are adopting. This presents an opportunity to examine the nature of the misinformation and disinformation being produced, and the theoretical and technological paradigm used to counter it. I argue that this approach is based on a conception of misinformation as epistemic pollution that can only justify a limited and potentially inadequate response , and that some of the measures undertaken in practice outrun this. In fact, social networks manage ecological and architectural conditions that influence discourse on their platforms in ways that should motivate reconsideration of the justifications that ground epistemic interventions to combat misinformation, and the types of intervention that they warrant. The editorial role of platforms should not be framed solely as the management of epistemic pollution, but instead as managing the epistemic environment in which narratives and social epistemic processes take place. There is an element of inevitable epistemic paternalism involved in this, and exploration of the independent constraints on its justifiability can help determine proper limits of its exercise in practice.

Computers and Society,Social and Information Networks
The social media Infodemic of health-related misinformation and technical solutions.

Flinta Rodrigues,Richard Newell,Giridhara R Babu,Tulika Chatterjee,Nimrat Kaur Sandhu,Latika Gupta

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hlpt.2024.100846

IF: 5.211

2024-01-31

Health Policy and Technology

Abstract:This paper discusses the role of social media algorithms in the spread of misinformation during the COVID-19 pandemic. It aims to propose solutions to combat misinformation and promote accurate, evidence-based public health information.

health policy & services
Prevalence of Health Misinformation on Social Media: Systematic Review

Victor Suarez-Lledo,Javier Alvarez-Galvez

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2196/17187

IF: 7.076

2021-01-20

Journal of Medical Internet Research

Abstract:Background Although at present there is broad agreement among researchers, health professionals, and policy makers on the need to control and combat health misinformation, the magnitude of this problem is still unknown. Consequently, it is fundamental to discover both the most prevalent health topics and the social media platforms from which these topics are initially framed and subsequently disseminated. Objective This systematic review aimed to identify the main health misinformation topics and their prevalence on different social media platforms, focusing on methodological quality and the diverse solutions that are being implemented to address this public health concern. Methods We searched PubMed, MEDLINE, Scopus, and Web of Science for articles published in English before March 2019, with a focus on the study of health misinformation in social media. We defined health misinformation as a health-related claim that is based on anecdotal evidence, false, or misleading owing to the lack of existing scientific knowledge. We included (1) articles that focused on health misinformation in social media, including those in which the authors discussed the consequences or purposes of health misinformation and (2) studies that described empirical findings regarding the measurement of health misinformation on these platforms. Results A total of 69 studies were identified as eligible, and they covered a wide range of health topics and social media platforms. The topics were articulated around the following six principal categories: vaccines (32%), drugs or smoking (22%), noncommunicable diseases (19%), pandemics (10%), eating disorders (9%), and medical treatments (7%). Studies were mainly based on the following five methodological approaches: social network analysis (28%), evaluating content (26%), evaluating quality (24%), content/text analysis (16%), and sentiment analysis (6%). Health misinformation was most prevalent in studies related to smoking products and drugs such as opioids and marijuana. Posts with misinformation reached 87% in some studies. Health misinformation about vaccines was also very common (43%), with the human papilloma virus vaccine being the most affected. Health misinformation related to diets or pro–eating disorder arguments were moderate in comparison to the aforementioned topics (36%). Studies focused on diseases (ie, noncommunicable diseases and pandemics) also reported moderate misinformation rates (40%), especially in the case of cancer. Finally, the lowest levels of health misinformation were related to medical treatments (30%). Conclusions The prevalence of health misinformation was the highest on Twitter and on issues related to smoking products and drugs. However, misinformation on major public health issues, such as vaccines and diseases, was also high. Our study offers a comprehensive characterization of the dominant health misinformation topics and a comprehensive description of their prevalence on different social media platforms, which can guide future studies and help in the development of evidence-based digital policy action plans.

health care sciences & services,medical informatics
Marketplaces of Misinformation: A Study of How Vaccine Misinformation Is Legitimized on Social Media

Giandomenico Di Domenico,Daniel Nunan,Valentina Pitardi

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/07439156221103860

2022-07-14

Abstract:Journal of Public Policy &Marketing, Ahead of Print. Combating harmful misinformation about pharmaceuticals on social media is a growing challenge. The complexity of health information, the role of expert intermediaries in disseminating information, and the information dynamics of social media create an environment where harmful misinformation spreads rapidly. However, little is known about the origin of this misinformation. This article explores the processes through which health misinformation from online marketplaces is legitimized and spread. Specifically, across one content analysis and two experimental studies, the authors investigate the role of highly legitimized influencer content in spreading vaccine misinformation. By analyzing a data set of social media posts and the websites where this content originates, the authors identify the legitimation processes that spread and normalize discussions about vaccine hesitancy (Study 1). Study 2 shows that expert cues increase the perceived legitimacy of misinformation, particularly for individuals who generally have positive attitudes toward vaccines. Study 3 demonstrates the role of expert legitimacy in driving consumers' sharing behavior on social media. This research addresses a gap in the understanding of how pharmaceutical misinformation originates and becomes legitimized. Given the importance of the effective communication of vaccine information, the authors present key challenges for policy makers.

business
'Debunk-It-Yourself': Health Professionals' Strategies for Responding to Misinformation on TikTok

Filipo Sharevski,Jennifer Vander Loop,Amy Devine,Peter Jachim,Sanchari Das

2024-12-06

Abstract:Misinformation is "sticky" in nature, requiring a considerable effort to undo its influence. One such effort is debunking or exposing the falsity of information. As an abundance of misinformation is on social media, platforms do bear some debunking responsibility in order to preserve their trustworthiness as information providers. A subject of interpretation, platforms poorly meet this responsibility and allow dangerous health misinformation to influence many of their users. This open route to harm did not sit well with health professional users, who recently decided to take the debunking into their own hands. To study this individual debunking effort - which we call 'Debunk-It-Yourself (DIY)' - we conducted an exploratory survey n=14 health professionals who wage a misinformation counter-influence campaign through videos on TikTok. We focused on two topics, nutrition and mental health, which are the ones most often subjected to misinformation on the platform. Our thematic analysis reveals that the counterinfluence follows a common process of initiation, selection, creation, and "stitching" or duetting a debunking video with a misinformation video. The 'Debunk-It-Yourself' effort was underpinned by three unique aspects: (i) it targets trending misinformation claims perceived to be of direct harm to people's health; (ii) it offers a symmetric response to the misinformation; and (iii) it is strictly based on scientific evidence and claimed clinical experience. Contrasting the 'Debunk-It-Yourself' effort with the one TikTok and other platforms (reluctantly) put in moderation, we offer recommendations for a structured response against the misinformation's influence by the users themselves.

Cryptography and Security,Computers and Society,Human-Computer Interaction,Social and Information Networks
Misunderstanding the harms of online misinformation

Ceren Budak,Brendan Nyhan,David M. Rothschild,Emily Thorson,Duncan J. Watts

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-024-07417-w

IF: 64.8

2024-06-06

Nature

Abstract:The controversy over online misinformation and social media has opened a gap between public discourse and scientific research. Public intellectuals and journalists frequently make sweeping claims about the effects of exposure to false content online that are inconsistent with much of the current empirical evidence. Here we identify three common misperceptions: that average exposure to problematic content is high, that algorithms are largely responsible for this exposure and that social media is a primary cause of broader social problems such as polarization. In our review of behavioural science research on online misinformation, we document a pattern of low exposure to false and inflammatory content that is concentrated among a narrow fringe with strong motivations to seek out such information. In response, we recommend holding platforms accountable for facilitating exposure to false and extreme content in the tails of the distribution, where consumption is highest and the risk of real-world harm is greatest. We also call for increased platform transparency, including collaborations with outside researchers, to better evaluate the effects of online misinformation and the most effective responses to it. Taking these steps is especially important outside the USA and Western Europe, where research and data are scant and harms may be more severe.

multidisciplinary sciences
Addressing Viral Medical Rumors and False or Misleading Information

Hussain S Lalani,Renée DiResta,Richard J Baron,David Scales

DOI: https://doi.org/10.7326/M23-1218

Abstract:The rapid spread of medical rumors and false or misleading information on social media during times of uncertainty is a vexing challenge that threatens public health. Understanding the information ecosystem, social media networks, and the scope of incentives that drive users and social media platforms can provide critical insights for strong coordination between stakeholders and funders to address this challenge. The COVID-19 pandemic created an opportunity to demonstrate the role of media monitoring and counter-messaging efforts in responding to dangerous medical rumors, misinformation, and disinformation. It also highlighted the challenges. The efforts of ThisIsOurShot and VacunateYa to spread accurate health information about COVID-19 and COVID-19 vaccines are described and lessons learned are discussed. These lessons include the need for substantial financial investments at the local and national levels to sustain and scale these types of programs. Examples in other fields that offer a path forward include Information Sharing and Analysis Centers and Public Health Emergency Operations Centers. Understanding the scale and scope of what it takes to address viral medical rumors, misinformation, and disinformation in a networked information environment should inspire elected leaders to consider policy and regulatory reforms. Our transformed information ecosystem requires new public health infrastructure to address information that threatens personal safety and population health.
An exploratory study of COVID-19 misinformation on Twitter

Gautam Kishore Shahi,Anne Dirkson,Tim A. Majchrzak

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.osnem.2020.100104

2021-03-01

Online Social Networks and Media

Abstract:During the COVID-19 pandemic, social media has become a home ground for misinformation. To tackle this infodemic, scientific oversight, as well as a better understanding by practitioners in crisis management, is needed. We have conducted an exploratory study into the propagation, authors and content of misinformation on Twitter around the topic of COVID-19 in order to gain early insights. We have collected all tweets mentioned in the verdicts of fact-checked claims related to COVID-19 by over 92 professional fact-checking organisations between January and mid-July 2020 and share this corpus with the community. This resulted in 1500 tweets relating to 1274 false and 226 partially false claims, respectively. Exploratory analysis of author accounts revealed that the verified twitter handle(including Organisation/celebrity) are also involved in either creating(new tweets) or spreading(retweet) the misinformation. Additionally, we found that false claims propagate faster than partially false claims. Compare to a background corpus of COVID-19 tweets, tweets with misinformation are more often concerned with discrediting other information on social media. Authors use less tentative language and appear to be more driven by concerns of potential harm to others. Our results enable us to suggest gaps in the current scientific coverage of the topic as well as propose actions for authorities and social media users to counter misinformation.
Prevalence of Health Misinformation on Social Media-Challenges and Mitigation Before, During, and Beyond the COVID-19 Pandemic: Scoping Literature Review

Dhouha Kbaier,Annemarie Kane,Mark McJury,Ian Kenny

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2196/38786

2024-08-19

Abstract:Background: This scoping review accompanies our research study "The Experience of Health Professionals With Misinformation and Its Impact on Their Job Practice: Qualitative Interview Study." It surveys online health misinformation and is intended to provide an understanding of the communication context in which health professionals must operate. Objective: Our objective was to illustrate the impact of social media in introducing additional sources of misinformation that impact health practitioners' ability to communicate effectively with their patients. In addition, we considered how the level of knowledge of practitioners mitigated the effect of misinformation and additional stress factors associated with dealing with outbreaks, such as the COVID-19 pandemic, that affect communication with patients. Methods: This study used a 5-step scoping review methodology following Arksey and O'Malley's methodology to map relevant literature published in English between January 2012 and March 2024, focusing on health misinformation on social media platforms. We defined health misinformation as a false or misleading health-related claim that is not based on valid evidence or scientific knowledge. Electronic searches were performed on PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar. We included studies on the extent and impact of health misinformation in social media, mitigation strategies, and health practitioners' experiences of confronting health misinformation. Our independent reviewers identified relevant articles for data extraction. Results: Our review synthesized findings from 70 sources on online health misinformation. It revealed a consensus regarding the significant problem of health misinformation disseminated on social network platforms. While users seek trustworthy sources of health information, they often lack adequate health and digital literacies, which is exacerbated by social and economic inequalities. Cultural contexts influence the reception of such misinformation, and health practitioners may be vulnerable, too. The effectiveness of online mitigation strategies like user correction and automatic detection are complicated by malicious actors and politicization. The role of health practitioners in this context is a challenging one. Although they are still best placed to combat health misinformation, this review identified stressors that create barriers to their abilities to do this well. Investment in health information management at local and global levels could enhance their capacity for effective communication with patients. Conclusions: This scoping review underscores the significance of addressing online health misinformation, particularly in the postpandemic era. It highlights the necessity for a collaborative global interdisciplinary effort to ensure equitable access to accurate health information, thereby empowering health practitioners to effectively combat the impact of online health misinformation. Academic research will need to be disseminated into the public domain in a way that is accessible to the public. Without equipping populations with health and digital literacies, the prevalence of online health misinformation will continue to pose a threat to global public health efforts.
The State of Infodemic on Twitter

Drishti Jain,Tavpritesh Sethi

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2105.07730

2021-05-17

Social and Information Networks

Abstract:Following the wave of misinterpreted, manipulated and malicious information growing on the Internet, the misinformation surrounding COVID-19 has become a paramount issue. In the context of the current COVID-19 pandemic, social media posts and platforms are at risk of rumors and misinformation in the face of the serious uncertainty surrounding the virus itself. At the same time, the uncertainty and new nature of COVID-19 means that other unconfirmed information that may appear "rumored" may be an important indicator of the behavior and impact of this new virus. Twitter, in particular, has taken a center stage in this storm where Covid-19 has been a much talked about subject. We have presented an exploratory analysis of the tweets and the users who are involved in spreading misinformation and then delved into machine learning models and natural language processing techniques to identify if a tweet contains misinformation.
A Deadly Infodemic: Social Media and the Power of COVID-19 Misinformation

Michael A Gisondi,Rachel Barber,Jemery Samuel Faust,Ali Raja,Matthew C Strehlow,Lauren M Westafer,Michael Gottlieb

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2196/35552

IF: 7.076

2022-02-01

Journal of Medical Internet Research

Abstract:COVID-19 is currently the third leading cause of death in the United States, and unvaccinated people continue to die in high numbers. Vaccine hesitancy and vaccine refusal are fueled by COVID-19 misinformation and disinformation on social media platforms. This online COVID-19 infodemic has deadly consequences. In this editorial, the authors examine the roles that social media companies play in the COVID-19 infodemic and their obligations to end it. They describe how fake news about the virus developed on social media and acknowledge the initially muted response by the scientific community to counteract misinformation. The authors then challenge social media companies to better mitigate the COVID-19 infodemic, describing legal and ethical imperatives to do so. They close with recommendations for better partnerships with community influencers and implementation scientists, and they provide the next steps for all readers to consider. This guest editorial accompanies the Journal of Medical Internet Research special theme issue, “Social Media, Ethics, and COVID-19 Misinformation.”

health care sciences & services,medical informatics
Understanding and Mitigating Mental Health Misinformation on Video Sharing Platforms

Viet Cuong Nguyen,Michael Birnbaum,Munmun De Choudhury

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2304.07417

2023-04-14

Social and Information Networks

Abstract:Despite the ever-strong demand for mental health care globally, access to traditional mental health services remains severely limited expensive, and stifled by stigma and systemic barriers. Thus, over the last few years, young people are increasingly turning to content on video-sharing platforms (VSPs) like TikTok and YouTube to help them navigate their mental health journey. However, navigating towards trustworthy information relating to mental health on these platforms is challenging, given the uncontrollable and unregulated growth of dedicated mental health content and content creators catering to a wide array of mental health conditions on these platforms. In this paper, we attempt to define what constitutes as "mental health misinformation" through examples. In addition, we also suggest some open questions to answer and challenges to tackle regarding this important and timely research topic
Misinformation on Social Media Platforms in the Global Crisis of Coronavirus

Elina Ahmadi

DOI: https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-7998-8235-0.ch010

2022-01-01

Abstract:With COVID-19 turning into a public health crisis, several theories about the origin of the virus on the internet have sparked controversy. Challenges of distinguishing legal content from fake increases the importance of deleting such information through social media networks. Misinformation was created from social media and websites without credible evidence. The COVID-19 epidemic has spread alongside what the World Health Organization calls “infodemic” misinformation. Each social media company responds differently to misinformation and therefore this lack of consistency can lead to confusion among social media users. As the dissemination of such information endangers public health, this chapter focuses on studies to track misinformation on the popular social media. Additionally, one of the consequences of the coronavirus outbreak is the creation of social panic and rapid changes in people's lifestyles caused by social networks. This study investigates the role of social networks in the formation of social phobia and lifestyle changes on account of the corona virus.
Time for Medicine and Public Health to Leave Platform X

Toomas Timpka

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2196/53810

2024-05-24

Abstract:For more than 50 years, digital technologies have been employed for the creation and distribution of knowledge in health services. In the last decade, digital social media have been developed for applications in clinical decision support and population health monitoring. Recently, these technologies have also been used for knowledge translation, such as in the process where research findings created in academic settings are established as evidence and distributed for use in clinical practice, policy making, and health self-management. To date, it has been common for medical and public health institutions to have social media accounts for the dissemination of novel research findings and to facilitate conversations about these findings. However, recent events such as the transformation of the microblog Twitter to platform X have brought to light the need for the social media industry to exploit user data to generate revenue. In this viewpoint, it is argued that a redirection of social media use is required in the translation of knowledge to action in the fields of medicine and public health. A new kind of social internet is currently forming, known as the "fediverse," which denotes an ensemble of open social media that can communicate with each other while remaining independent platforms. In several countries, government institutions, universities, and newspapers use open social media to distribute information and enable discussions. These organizations control their own channels while being able to communicate with other platforms through open standards. Examples of medical knowledge translation via such open social media platforms, where users are less exposed to disinformation than in general platforms, are also beginning to appear. The current status of the social media industry calls for a broad discussion about the use of social technologies by health institutions involving researchers and health service practitioners, academic leaders, scientific publishers, social technology providers, policy makers, and the public. This debate should not primarily take place on social media platforms but rather at universities, in scientific journals, at public seminars, and other venues, allowing for the transparent and undisturbed communication and formation of opinions.

Medical misinformation on social media—are the platforms equipped to be the judge?

Medical and Health-Related Misinformation on Social Media: Bibliometric Study of the Scientific Literature

Medical misinformation in social media: Representations of gastrointestinal disorders on a short video platform

Cancer misinformation on social media

Systematic Literature Review on the Spread of Health-related Misinformation on Social Media

YouTube COVID-19 Vaccine Misinformation on Twitter: Platform Interactions and Moderation Blind Spots

Unveiling misinformation on YouTube: examining the content of COVID-19 vaccination misinformation videos in Switzerland

COVID-19 Misinformation and Disinformation on Social Networks -- The Limits of Veritistic Countermeasures

The social media Infodemic of health-related misinformation and technical solutions.

Prevalence of Health Misinformation on Social Media: Systematic Review

Marketplaces of Misinformation: A Study of How Vaccine Misinformation Is Legitimized on Social Media

'Debunk-It-Yourself': Health Professionals' Strategies for Responding to Misinformation on TikTok

Misunderstanding the harms of online misinformation

Addressing Viral Medical Rumors and False or Misleading Information

An exploratory study of COVID-19 misinformation on Twitter

Prevalence of Health Misinformation on Social Media-Challenges and Mitigation Before, During, and Beyond the COVID-19 Pandemic: Scoping Literature Review

The State of Infodemic on Twitter

A Deadly Infodemic: Social Media and the Power of COVID-19 Misinformation

Understanding and Mitigating Mental Health Misinformation on Video Sharing Platforms

Misinformation on Social Media Platforms in the Global Crisis of Coronavirus

Time for Medicine and Public Health to Leave Platform X