ArticleBMJ open2020
COVID-19 and 'immune boosting' on the internet: a content analysis of Google search results.
Article in BMJ open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 papers, 4 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
32 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 52 citations in OpenAlex.
- Physical Activity Misinformation on Social Media: Systematic Review.JMIR infodemiology · 2025Pooled it
- Quality and accuracy of online nutrition-related information: a systematic review of content analysis studies.Public health nutrition · 2023Pooled it
- Select Dietary Supplement Ingredients for Preserving and Protecting the Immune System in Healthy Individuals: A Systematic Review.Nutrients · 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
- Quality of rib fracture-related video information on TikTok and Bilibili: a cross-sectional study.Journal of thoracic disease · 2026Article
- Regulatory bodies must critically assess their role in the wellness wave of supplement marketing.Lancet regional health. Americas · 2026Article
- Anti-masking Posts on Instagram: Content Analysis During the COVID-19 Pandemic.Safety and health at work · 2025Article
- Racial/ethnic inequities in potentially harmful supplement use: Results of a prospective US cohort during the COVID-19 pandemic.Public health · 2025Article
- A Bibliometric Analysis of Exosomes Associated with Rheumatic Diseases in the 21st Century.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2025Article
- Result Assessment Tool (RAT): empowering search engine data analysis.PeerJ. Computer science · 2025Article
- Nurses' use of 'wellness' supplements during the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States.Journal of advanced nursing · 2024Article
- Article
- Businesses marketing purported stem cell treatments and exosome therapies for COVID-19: An analysis of direct-to-consumer online advertising claims.Stem cell reports · 2023Article
- Performance-Based Measurement of eHealth Literacy: Systematic Scoping Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2023Article
- The use of herbal and dietary supplements for COVID-19 prevention: A survey among the public in a Malaysian suburban town.Journal of herbal medicine · 2023Article
- Article
- Financial precarity, food insecurity, and psychological distress prospectively linked with use of potentially dangerous dietary supplements during the pandemic in the US.Frontiers in public health · 2023Article
- Article
- Analysis of Select Dietary Supplement Products Marketed to Support or Boost the Immune System.JAMA network open · 2022Article
- Environmental and public health co-benefits of consumer switches to immunity-supporting food.Ambio · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe spread of misinformation has accompanied the coronavirus pandemic, including topics such as immune boosting to prevent COVID-19. This study explores how immune boosting is portrayed on the internet during the COVID-19 pandemic.
designContent analysis.
methodsWe compiled a dataset of 227 webpages from Google searches in Canada and the USA using the phrase 'boost immunity' AND 'coronavirus' on 1 April 2020. We coded webpages for typology and portrayal of immune boosting and supplements. We recorded mentions of microbiome, whether the webpage was selling or advertising an immune boosting product or service, and suggested strategies for boosting immunity.
resultsNo significant differences were found between webpages that appeared in the searches in Canada and the USA. The most common types of webpages were from news (40.5%) and commercial (24.7%) websites. The concept of immune boosting was portrayed as beneficial for avoiding COVID-19 in 85.5% of webpages and supplements were portrayed as beneficial in 40% of the webpages, but commercial sites were more likely to have these portrayals. The top immune boosting strategies were vitamin C (34.8%), diet (34.4%), sleep (34.4%), exercise (30.8%) and zinc (26.9%). Less than 10% of the webpages provide any critique of the concept of immune boosting.
conclusionsPairing evidence-based advice for maintaining one's health (eg, healthy diet, exercise, sleep) with the phrase immune boosting and strategies lacking in evidence may inadvertently help to legitimise the concept, making it a powerful marketing tool. Results demonstrate how the spread of misinformation is complex and often more subtle than blatant fraudulent claims.
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.