Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33968601›Full record

ReviewZeitschrift fur Gesundheitswissenschaften = Journal of public health2023

Understanding misinformation infodemic during public health emergencies due to large-scale disease outbreaks: a rapid review.

Nashit Chowdhury, Ayisha Khalid, Tanvir C Turin

Open access · bronzeAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Zeitschrift fur Gesundheitswissenschaften = Journal of public health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
34citing papers in PubMed
24.6field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

34 citing papers in PubMed, 87 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Observational
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Barriers to Public Health Trust-Building Using Social Media: A Qualitative Analysis.Disaster medicine and public health preparedness · 2025
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. (Why) Is Misinformation a Problem?Perspectives on psychological science : a journal of the Association for Psychological Science · 2023
    Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Nashit ChowdhuryDepartment of Family Medicine, Department of Community Health Sciences, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, G012F, Health Sciences Centre, 3330 Hospital Drive NW, Calgary, AB T2N 4N1 Canada.
Ayisha KhalidDepartment of Family Medicine, Department of Community Health Sciences, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, G012F, Health Sciences Centre, 3330 Hospital Drive NW, Calgary, AB T2N 4N1 Canada.
Tanvir C TurinDepartment of Family Medicine, Department of Community Health Sciences, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, G012F, Health Sciences Centre, 3330 Hospital Drive NW, Calgary, AB T2N 4N1 Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-7499-5050
University of Calgary · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Aim: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has caused hundreds of thousands of deaths, impacted the flow of life and resulted in an immeasurable amount of socio-economic damage. However, not all of this damage is attributable to the disease itself; much of it has occurred due to the prevailing misinformation around COVID-19. This rapid integrative review will draw on knowledge from the literature about misinformation during previous abrupt large-scale infectious disease outbreaks to enable policymakers, governments and health institutions to proactively mitigate the spread and effect of misinformation. Subject and methods: For this rapid integrative review, we systematically searched MEDLINE and Google Scholar and extracted the literature on misinformation during abrupt large-scale infectious disease outbreaks since 2000. We screened articles using predetermined inclusion criteria. We followed an updated methodology for integrated reviews and adjusted it for our rapid review approach. Results: We found widespread misinformation in all aspects of large-scale infectious disease outbreaks since 2000, including prevention, treatment, risk factor, transmission mode, complications and vaccines. Conspiracy theories also prevailed, particularly involving vaccines. Misinformation most frequently has been reported regarding Ebola, and women and youth are particularly vulnerable to misinformation. A lack of scientific knowledge by individuals and a lack of trust in the government increased the consumption of misinformation, which is disseminated quickly by the unregulated media, particularly social media. Conclusion: This review identified the nature and pattern of misinformation during large-scale infectious disease outbreaks, which could potentially be used to address misinformation during the ongoing COVID-19 or any future pandemic.

Indexed as

COVID-19DisinformationHealth literacyInfodemicMisinformationOutbreakPandemic

Identifiers

PMID33968601
PMCPMC8088318
OpenAlexW3157353928

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.