ArticleCureus2022
Discerning Fact From Fiction: An Assessment of Coronavirus-19 Misinformation Among Patients in Rural Michigan.
Article in Cureus, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Reviewer Academy of the Society of Critical Care Medicine: Key Principles and Strategic Plan.Critical care medicine · 2023Article
- Canadian public perceptions and experiences with information during the COVID-19 pandemic: strategies to optimize future risk communications.BMC public health · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Coronavirus-19 misinformation poses a unique challenge for public health communication efforts. In rural communities, COVID-19 misinformation is not well studied. We investigate patients' ability to discriminate COVID-19 fact from fiction from their news sources, as well as general COVID-19 knowledge, perceptions, public health practices, and their primary news sources in 258 adult patients at a primary health clinic in rural Michigan. Most of the population surveyed was able to correctly differentiate reliable COVID-19 public health information from fabricated information. However, only 55.4% of participants reported that they would be somewhat or extremely likely to get a COVID-19 vaccine. The most reported news source was mainstream broadcast television channels such as CBS and ABC. Our data support those older participants are better informed and more likely to practice safe public health practices than younger participants. Based on our data, we offer strategies for public health campaigns in rural communities, such as targeted interventions towards younger people and utilizing local television stations and community institutions to disseminate public health communications and health promotions. Public health interventions beyond education should be considered to mitigate the gap between COVID-19 knowledge and prevention behaviors. Future studies should investigate the role of health care providers in COVID-19 communication with patients, understanding hesitations toward COVID-19 vaccination, and communication strategies to best increase COVID-19 vaccine uptake in rural communities.
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.