Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35321021›Full record

ArticleDigital health

The importance of social media users' responses in tackling digital COVID-19 misinformation in Africa.

Ruth Stewart, Andile Madonsela, Nkululeko Tshabalala, Linda Etale, Nicola Theunissen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Digital health. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

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

5 authors.

Ruth StewartAfrica Centre for Evidence, University of Johannesburg, Research Village, Bunting Road Campus, Auckland Park, Johannesburg, South Africa.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9891-9028
Andile MadonselaAfrica Centre for Evidence, University of Johannesburg, Research Village, Bunting Road Campus, Auckland Park, Johannesburg, South Africa.
Nkululeko TshabalalaAfrica Centre for Evidence, University of Johannesburg, Research Village, Bunting Road Campus, Auckland Park, Johannesburg, South Africa.
Linda EtaleAfrica Centre for Evidence, University of Johannesburg, Research Village, Bunting Road Campus, Auckland Park, Johannesburg, South Africa.
Nicola TheunissenAfrica Check, Johannesburg, South Africa.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: Digital technologies present both an opportunity and a threat for advancing public health. At a time of pandemic, social media has become a tool for the rapid spread of misinformation. Mitigating the impacts of misinformation is particularly acute across Africa, where WhatsApp and other forms of social media dominate, and where the dual threats of misinformation and COVID-19 threaten lives and livelihoods. Given the scale of the problem within Africa, we set out to understand (i) the potential harm that misinformation causes, (ii) the available evidence on how to mitigate that misinformation and (iii) how user responses to misinformation shape the potential for those mitigating strategies to reduce the risk of harm. Methods: We undertook a multi-method study, combining a rapid review of the research evidence with a survey of WhatsApp users across Africa. Results: We identified 87 studies for inclusion in our review and had 286 survey respondents from 17 African countries. Our findings show the considerable harms caused by public health misinformation in Africa and the lack of evidence for or against strategies to mitigate against such harms. Furthermore, they highlight how social media users' responses to public health misinformation can mitigate and exacerbate potential harms. Understanding the ways in which social media users respond to misinformation sheds light on potential mitigation strategies. Conclusions: Public health practitioners who utilise digital health approaches must not underestimate the importance of considering the role of social media in the circulation of misinformation, nor of the responses of social media users in shaping attempts to mitigate against the harms of such misinformation.

Indexed as

Communication#COVID-19evidence-based practicepublic healthsocial media

Identifiers

PMID35321021
PMCPMC8935564

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.