ReviewProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America2021
Misinformation and public opinion of science and health: Approaches, findings, and future directions.
Review in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 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
27 citing papers in PubMed.
- Message Source Credibility and E-Cigarette Harm Perceptions among Young Adults.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Trial
- Psychological understanding of misinformation and disinformation in the face of environmental crises: Introduction to the special issue.British journal of psychology (London, England : 1953) · 2026Article
- From BioSkills to LifeSkills-a framework for developing life skills for non-science majors in introductory life science courses.Journal of microbiology & biology education · 2026Article
- Improving science literacy in the newsroom: Experimental evidence.PNAS nexus · 2026Article
- How corrective messages persuade in AI era: message sidedness, source attribution, and psychological pathways in health misinformation correction.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
- Shared disbelief and shared belief: Belief and disbelief as drivers of interpersonal neural synchronization during narrative processing.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025Article
- The inaccurate citation of the "Universal Declaration of Animal Rights" (UDAR) in the scientific literature: a scoping review.BMC veterinary research · 2025Article
- Updated ASM Curriculum Guidelines describe core microbiology content to modernize the framework for microbiology education.Journal of microbiology & biology education · 2024Article
- Cognitive factors impacting patient understanding of laboratory test information.Journal of pathology informatics · 2024Review
- Evidence-based scientific thinking and decision-making in everyday life.Cognitive research: principles and implications · 2024Article
- Perceived experts are prevalent and influential within an antivaccine community on Twitter.PNAS nexus · 2024Article
- Examination of public perceptions of microbes and microbiomes in the United States reveals insights for science communication.PloS one · 2024Article
- Understanding societal challenges: a NeurotechFrontiers in neuroscience · 2024Article
- Examination of public perceptions of microbes and microbiomes in the United States reveals insights for science communication.PloS one · 2024Article
- Infodemic: Challenges and solutions in topic discovery and data process.Archives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique · 2023Article
- Scaling up the discovery of hesitancy profiles by identifying the framing of beliefs towards vaccine confidence in Twitter discourse.Journal of behavioral medicine · 2023Article
- The Importance of Fostering and Funding Scientific Research, and its Relevance to Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry.Environmental toxicology and chemistry · 2023Article
- Are YouTube Videos a Useful and Reliable Source of Information for Patients with Temporomandibular Joint Disorders?Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- Taking a Shot: The Impact of Information Frames and Channels on Vaccination Willingness in a Pandemic.Vaccines · 2023Article
- Applying Blockchain Technology in Network Public Opinion Risk Management System in Big Data Environment.Computational intelligence and neuroscience · 2023Article
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
A summary of the public opinion research on misinformation in the realm of science/health reveals inconsistencies in how the term has been defined and operationalized. A diverse set of methodologies have been employed to study the phenomenon, with virtually all such work identifying misinformation as a cause for concern. While studies completely eliminating misinformation impacts on public opinion are rare, choices around the packaging and delivery of correcting information have shown promise for lessening misinformation effects. Despite a growing number of studies on the topic, there remain many gaps in the literature and opportunities for future studies.
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.