ArticleBulletin of the National Research Centre2021
The danger of denialism: lessons from the Brazilian pandemic.
Article in Bulletin of the National Research Centre, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- The adaptation process of the Brazilian National Health System to the effects of climate change.Epidemiologia e servicos de saude : revista do Sistema Unico de Saude do Brasil · 2026Article
- COVID-19 pandemic and enrollment of critically Ill children in randomized clinical trials.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2025Article
- The Ant and the Grasshopper: Does Biased Cognition Compromise Agency in the Case of Delusions and Conspiracy Theories?Review of philosophy and psychology · 2024Article
- A plausible hypothesis for the higher Covid-19 mortality in Brazil.African health sciences · 2023Article
- COVID-19 in a Pre-Omicron Era: A Cross-Sectional Immuno-Epidemical and Genomic Evaluation.Vaccines · 2023Article
- Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Black Communities in Canada.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023Article
- [Online survey on the reasons for vaccine hesitancy against COVID-19 in children and adolescents in Brazil].Cadernos de saude publica · 2023Article
- Article
- Ethical principles for infodemiology and infoveillance studies concerning infodemic management on social media.Frontiers in public health · 2023Article
- 100 years later, little has changed in Brazil: disinformation and pandemic.African health sciences · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundScientific denialism has always had harmful consequences for humanity, but with the advent of the pandemic these effects seem to have been accentuated. MAIN BODY: Unwillingness to accept the facts about the COVID-19 pandemic ascertained by scientists and public health authorities has led to widespread scientific denialism, including the emergence of conspiracy theories of all sorts. Examples are diverse, reaching both developed and developing countries, arriving through populist leaders and the spread of conspiracy theories through social media. SHORT
conclusionIt is important to pay attention to the risk of the extremes of this denialism and the possible repercussions, especially in countries that have leaders who agree with these conceptions, such as Brazil and the USA.
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.