ArticleJMIR public health and surveillance2020
Misinformation of COVID-19 on the Internet: Infodemiology Study.
Article in JMIR public health and surveillance, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 233 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
233 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 627 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Prevalence, Features, Influencing Factors, and Solutions for COVID-19 Vaccine Misinformation: Systematic Review.JMIR public health and surveillance · 2023Pooled it
- Disinformation: A Bibliometric Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Pooled it
- Quality of web-based information about the coronavirus disease 2019: a rapid systematic review of infodemiology studies published during the first year of the pandemic.BMC public health · 2022Pooled it
- Accuracy prompts are a replicable and generalizable approach for reducing the spread of misinformation.Nature communications · 2022Pooled it
- The Impact and Applications of Social Media Platforms for Public Health Responses Before and During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Systematic Literature Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2022Pooled it
- Community-Level Experiences, Understandings, and Responses to COVID-19 in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: A Systematic Review of Qualitative and Ethnographic Studies.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Pooled it
- The prevalence of depressive symptoms, anxiety symptoms and sleep disturbance in higher education students during the COVID-19 pandemic: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Psychiatry research · 2021Pooled it
- Understanding Emerging Adult Workers' Problematic Internet Use Before and During the Coronavirus Pandemic: Roles of Personality Traits, Online Activities, and Mental Health Symptoms.The Psychiatric quarterly · 2026Article
- eHealth literacy in emergency care: a scoping review.BMC health services research · 2026Article
- Understanding Online Health Information Consumption Through Web Analytics of the Italian Society of Pharmacology Magazine: 3-Year Descriptive Analysis.JMIR formative research · 2026Article
- Relationship Between Online Health Information Acquisition and Shared Decision-Making Among Patients With Diabetes: Cross-Sectional Survey Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Evaluating the efficacy of digital media platforms in disseminating public health information: A global review with implications for South Africa.African journal of primary health care & family medicine · 2026Review
- Evaluating Turkish society's approaches to hemorrhoid treatment using text mining and sentiment analysis methods.Frontiers in surgery · 2026Article
- Evaluating the accuracy, quality, and reliability of septoplasty-related content on TikTok.Frontiers in digital health · 2026Article
- Article
- Quality of Online Information on Patient-Specific Knee Arthroplasty and Its Impact on Personalized Care.Clinics and practice · 2025Article
- Quality Assessment of Health Information on Social Media During a Public Health Crisis: Infodemiology Study.JMIR infodemiology · 2025Article
- Assessment of hand hygiene awareness and practice levels amid the COVID-19 period: a comparative study of the public in Jordan and the United Arab Emirates.BMC public health · 2025Article
- Notes from Self-Isolation: Imagination in Times of Ruptures.Integrative psychological & behavioral science · 2025Article
- Transformer-Based Tool for Automated Fact-Checking of Online Health Information: Development Study.JMIR infodemiology · 2025Article
173 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe internet has become an important source of health information for users worldwide. The novel coronavirus caused a pandemic search for information with broad dissemination of false or misleading health information.
objectiveThe aim of this study was to evaluate the quality and readability of online information about the coronavirus disease (COVID-19), which was a trending topic on the internet, using validated instruments and relating the quality of information to its readability.
methodsThe search was based on the term "Wuhan Coronavirus" on the Google website (February 6, 2020). At the search time, the terms "COVID-19" or "SARS-CoV-2" (severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2) did not exist. Critical analysis was performed on the first 110 hits using the Health on the Net Foundation Code of Conduct (HONcode), the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) benchmark, the DISCERN instrument, and Google ranking.
resultsThe first 110 websites were critically analyzed, and only 1.8% (n=2) of the websites had the HONcode seal. The JAMA benchmark showed that 39.1% (n=43) of the websites did not have any of the categories required by this tool, and only 10.0% (11/110) of the websites had the four quality criteria required by JAMA. The DISCERN score showed that 70.0% (n=77) of the websites were evaluated as having a low score and none were rated as having a high score.
conclusionsNonhealth personnel and the scientific community need to be aware about the quality of the information they read and produce, respectively. The Wuhan coronavirus health crisis misinformation was produced by the media, and the misinformation was obtained by users from the internet. The use of the internet has a risk to public health, and, in cases like this, the governments should be developing strategies to regulate health information on the internet without censuring the population. By February 6, 2020, no quality information was available on the internet about COVID-19.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.