ReviewIntegrative medicine research2021
Communication vs evidence: What hinders the outreach of science during an infodemic? A narrative review.
Review in Integrative medicine research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 3 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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Development of a Conceptual Framework of Health Misinformation During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Systematic Review of Reviews.JMIR public health and surveillance · 2025Pooled it
- Comparative synthesis of sociocultural and political influences (SPIs) on COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy: an interdisciplinary systematic review.BMC public health · 2025Pooled it
- Systematic reviews of convalescent plasma in COVID-19 continue to be poorly conducted and reported: a systematic review.Journal of clinical epidemiology · 2022Pooled it
- Literacy and Language Barriers to Overcome in Laboratory Medicine.Clinics in laboratory medicine · 2024Review
- Descriptions of Scientific Evidence and Uncertainty of Unproven COVID-19 Therapies in US News: Content Analysis Study.JMIR infodemiology · 2024Article
- Research evidence communication for policy-makers: a rapid scoping review on frameworks, guidance and tools, and barriers and facilitators.Health research policy and systems · 2024Article
- Production and use of rapid responses during the COVID-19 pandemic in Quebec (Canada): perspectives from evidence synthesis producers and decision makers.Health research policy and systems · 2024Article
- Infodemic: Challenges and solutions in topic discovery and data process.Archives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique · 2023Article
- Defining Misinformation and Related Terms in Health-Related Literature: Scoping Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2023Article
- Infodemic in Public health a reemerging public health threat: a scoping review.F1000Research · 2023Article
- Understanding Factors Influencing Polio Vaccine Uptake in Ghana-Developing Meaningful Community Mobilization and Engagement Strategies in Collaboration with Religious Leaders.The American journal of tropical medicine and hygiene · 2022Article
- Impact of a Long Lockdown on Mental Health and the Role of Media Use: Web-Based Survey Study.JMIR mental health · 2022Article
- COVID-19 and theHealthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic is placing significant pressure on national and international health organizations and the measures taken to combat it are having many impacts beyond health. At the same time, misleading communication practices and what has been called an "infodemic" by the World Health Organization have been hampering the uptake of coronavirus-related scientific information. Moreover, public awareness about the dangers of the infodemic remains poor, and misinformation may lead to hazardous behaviours. We therefore analysed factors potentially undermining communication of scientific evidence and proposed strategies to counteract this phenomenon.
methodsWe sought official academic and institutional publications of any type, published in English and analyzed their approaches to communication used during the pandemic.
resultsThe factors that might undermine appropriate communication include but are not limited to (a) the exponential increase of COVID-19-related publications, often including biases in the peer-review and editorial process; (b) the role of traditional media; (c) politicization of the virus; and (d) the impact of social media. We argue that evidence synthesis and knowledge translation are useful tools to communicate accurate scientific evidence to decision-makers.
conclusionClear and concise messages in this form can help decision-makers to interpret data correctly, take consequent actions, and avoid being compromised by low-quality or even misleading information.
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.