Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34208154›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2021

COVID-19 Scientific Facts vs. Conspiracy Theories: Is Science Failing to Pass Its Message?

Marios Constantinou, Antonios Kagialis, Maria Karekla

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

23 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  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.

Marios ConstantinouDepartment of Social Sciences, School of Humanities and Social Sciences, University of Nicosia, Nicosia 2417, Cyprus.ORCID 0000-0002-6646-5877
Antonios KagialisDepartment of Social Sciences, School of Humanities and Social Sciences, University of Nicosia, Nicosia 2417, Cyprus.
Maria KareklaDepartment of Psychology, University of Cyprus, P.O. Box 20537, Nicosia 1678, Cyprus.ORCID 0000-0001-7021-7908

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Science may be failing to convince a significant number of people about COVID-19 scientific facts and needed public health measures. Individual and social factors are behind believing conspiracy theories. Adults (N = 1001) were asked to rate their beliefs in various conspiracy theories circulating in social media, rate their psychological distress relating to COVID-19, rate their trust in science to solve COVID-19 problems, and rate their willingness to adhere to measures regarding social distancing and quarantine. The findings showed conspiracy theories are widely believed and related to lower age, lower education, living in less densely populated areas, and lower income. Stronger conspiracy theory beliefs predicted science mistrust and unwillingness to adhere to public health measures. Psychological state was a strong predictor of conspiracy beliefs. Recommendations, stemming from the findings, for reducing such beliefs and better serving public health are discussed.

Indexed as

COVID-19Social MediaAdultHumansQuarantineSARS-CoV-2Trustconspiracy theoriesCOVID-19psychological statepublic healthquarantine measuressocial distancing

Identifiers

PMID34208154
PMCPMC8296162

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.