ArticleCureus2022
The COVID-19 Infodemic Through Facebook: Comparison of Content and the Accuracy of Breastfeeding Information.
Article in Cureus, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Impact of personal and environmental factors affecting exclusive breastfeeding practices in the first six months during the COVID-19 pandemic in Thailand: a mixed-methods approach.International breastfeeding journal · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background The coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic has resulted in a significant increase in the number of people seeking online support and information, particularly on social media. Nevertheless, the nature and trend of internet information, as well as its accuracy, are questionable. This study aimed to assess and compare the content, type/form, and degree of accuracy of breastfeeding information on Facebook before and during the COVID-19 pandemic (n = 288/phase). Methodology The data were gathered from Malaysian public and group/page Facebook posts (n = 456). Keyword searches were conducted using Malay and English breastfeeding terms. The dataset was screened and entered into a structured codebook. The Delphi approach was used to assess the accuracy of posts' content performed by breastfeeding experts. Results Sharing personal experience (53.2%) was the most common topic in breastfeeding-related posts, followed by seeking questions (39.3%) and knowledge (8.0%). Sharing personal stories and knowledge posts were higher during COVID-19 than before (p = 0.001), although the seeking questions category was higher before the pandemic (p = 0.001). Most information posted was in text form (94.5%). About half of the posts (46.5%) were misleading, while (43.7%) were accurate. There was a significant difference in the accuracy of online posts before and during the COVID-19 pandemic (p = 0.001). Conclusions Compared to the pre-pandemic phase, forms/types of information on Facebook remained consistent, whereas the breastfeeding information content and its degree of accuracy differed during the pandemic.We need to explore other aspects of breastfeeding online content as well as its engagement, especially during a pandemic. Knowing the infant feeding-related topics that have been discussed and questioned on social media, as well as the accuracy of the data, allows policymakers and scientific communities to plan strategies for spreading credible breastfeeding information online. This includes creating interactive online media types of visual guidelines, web resources, and breastfeeding apps.
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.