Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34970164›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in psychiatry2021

Public Emotional and Coping Responses to the COVID-19 Infodemic: A Review and Recommendations.

Weijun Ying, Cecilia Cheng

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in psychiatry, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing 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

19 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. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Lessons from COVID-19 for future disasters: an opinion paper.Revista espanola de quimioterapia : publicacion oficial de la Sociedad Espanola de Quimioterapia · 2022
    Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Social Media Addiction during COVID-19-Mandated Physical Distancing: Relatedness Needs as Motives.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Article
  18. Article
  19. 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

2 authors.

Weijun YingSchool of Education, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, United States.
Cecilia ChengDepartment of Psychology, The University of Hong Kong, Pokfulam, Hong Kong SAR, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Since its onset in early 2020, the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has adversely affected not only the physical but also the mental health of people worldwide. Healthcare professionals and laypersons have sought to learn more about this novel and highly transmissible disease to better understand its etiology, treatment, and prevention. However, information overload and misinformation related to COVID-19 have elicited considerable public anxiety and created additional health threats. Collectively, these problems have been recognized by the World Health Organization as an "infodemic." This review provides an overview of the global challenges posed by the COVID-19 infodemic, and used the psychological entropy model as a guiding framework to explicate the potential causes of the infodemic and identify potential solutions to mitigate impacts on public health. We first examine the role of anxiety in information processing and then delineate the adverse impacts of the infodemic. Finally, we propose strategies to combat the infodemic at the public, community, and individual levels.

Indexed as

anxietycoronaviruseHealthfake newsfalse informationhealth literacymisinformationpandemic

Identifiers

PMID34970164
PMCPMC8712438

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.