ArticleSimulation2020
Misinformation making a disease outbreak worse: outcomes compared for influenza, monkeypox, and norovirus.
Article in Simulation, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 43 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
43 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 128 citations in OpenAlex.
- The role of social media on COVID-19 preventive behaviors worldwide, systematic review.PloS one · 2024Pooled it
- Debunking highly prevalent health misinformation using audio dramas delivered by WhatsApp: evidence from a randomised controlled trial in Sierra Leone.BMJ global health · 2021Trial
- Misinformation in Social Media Narratives on Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza: Systematic Content Analysis of Facebook and Instagram Posts.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Social, mobility and contact networks in shaping health behaviours and infectious disease dynamics: a scoping review.Infectious diseases of poverty · 2025Article
- A Compartmental Mathematical Model to Assess the Impact of Vaccination, Isolation, and Key Epidemiological Parameters on Mpox Control.Medical sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- A qualitative report on the experiences of physicians during the pandemic of COVID-19.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Adaptive behaviour during epidemics: a social risk appraisal approach to modelling dynamics.Journal of the Royal Society, Interface · 2025Article
- Modeling the amplification of epidemic spread by individuals exposed to misinformation on social media.Npj complexity · 2025Article
- BharatSim: An agent-based modelling framework for India.PLoS computational biology · 2024Article
- Modelling the impact of human behavior using a two-layer Watts-Strogatz network for transmission and control of Mpox.BMC infectious diseases · 2024Article
- Social and Behavioural Change Communication Challenges, Opportunities and Lessons from Past Public Health Emergencies and Disease Outbreaks: A Scoping Review.Annals of global health · 2024Article
- A sentiment and content analysis of tweets on monkeypox stigma among the LGBTQ+ community: A cue to risk communication plan.Dialogues in health · 2023Article
- A Cross-Sectional Study To Assess Knowledge of Monkeypox Among Medical Students and Graduates in India.Cureus · 2023Article
- Mathematical modeling of mpox: A scoping review.One health (Amsterdam, Netherlands) · 2023Article
- A Twitter dataset for Monkeypox, May 2022.Data in brief · 2023Article
- Investigating the effects of various control measures on economy and spread of COVID-19 in Turkey: a system dynamics approach.Simulation · 2023Article
- Monkeypox: New epidemic or fake news? Study of psychological and social factors associated with fake news attitudes of monkeypox in Italy.Frontiers in psychology · 2023Article
- Assessment of Knowledge, Perceptions, and Attitudes During the Global Mpox Outbreak in June 2022: A Cross-Sectional Study From the United Arab Emirates.International journal of public health · 2023Article
- Monkeypox: a global health emergency.Frontiers in microbiology · 2023Review
- A survey of uncover misleading and cyberbullying on social media for public health.Cluster computing · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Health misinformation can exacerbate infectious disease outbreaks. Especially pernicious advice could be classified as "fake news": manufactured with no respect for accuracy and often integrated with emotive or conspiracy-framed narratives. We built an agent-based model that simulated separate but linked circulating contagious disease and sharing of health advice (classified as useful or harmful). Such advice has potential to influence human risk-taking behavior and therefore the risk of acquiring infection, especially as people are more likely in observed social networks to share bad advice. We test strategies proposed in the recent literature for countering misinformation. Reducing harmful advice from 50% to 40% of circulating information, or making at least 20% of the population unable to share or believe harmful advice, mitigated the influence of bad advice in the disease outbreak outcomes. How feasible it is to try to make people "immune" to misinformation or control spread of harmful advice should be explored.
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.