Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35975112›Full record

ArticleWorld wide web2023

Improving medical experts' efficiency of misinformation detection: an exploratory study.

Aleksandra Nabożny, Bartłomiej Balcerzak, Mikołaj Morzy, Adam Wierzbicki, Pavel Savov, Kamil Warpechowski

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in World wide web, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Health Misinformation Detection: Approaches, Challenges and Opportunities.Inquiry : a journal of medical care organization, provision and financing
    Review
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

6 authors.

Aleksandra NabożnyGdańsk University of Technology, Gdańsk, Poland.ORCID 0000-0001-9534-142X
Bartłomiej BalcerzakPolish-Japanese Academy of Information Technology, Warsaw, Poland.ORCID 0000-0003-0881-5362
Mikołaj MorzyPolish-Japanese Academy of Information Technology, Warsaw, Poland.ORCID 0000-0002-2905-9538
Adam WierzbickiPolish-Japanese Academy of Information Technology, Warsaw, Poland.ORCID 0000-0003-0075-7030
Pavel SavovPolish-Japanese Academy of Information Technology, Warsaw, Poland.ORCID 0000-0003-2089-8383
Kamil WarpechowskiPolish-Japanese Academy of Information Technology, Warsaw, Poland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Fighting medical disinformation in the era of the pandemic is an increasingly important problem. Today, automatic systems for assessing the credibility of medical information do not offer sufficient precision, so human supervision and the involvement of medical expert annotators are required. Our work aims to optimize the utilization of medical experts' time. We also equip them with tools for semi-automatic initial verification of the credibility of the annotated content. We introduce a general framework for filtering medical statements that do not require manual evaluation by medical experts, thus focusing annotation efforts on non-credible medical statements. Our framework is based on the construction of filtering classifiers adapted to narrow thematic categories. This allows medical experts to fact-check and identify over two times more non-credible medical statements in a given time interval without applying any changes to the annotation flow. We verify our results across a broad spectrum of medical topic areas. We perform quantitative, as well as exploratory analysis on our output data. We also point out how those filtering classifiers can be modified to provide experts with different types of feedback without any loss of performance.

Indexed as

Credibility assessmente-healthHuman-in-the-loopMachine learningMisinformationNatural language processingText-mining

Identifiers

PMID35975112
PMCPMC9371952

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.