ArticleVaccines2023
Scientific Misinformation and Mistrust of COVID-19 Preventive Measures among the UK Population: A Pilot Study.
Article in Vaccines, 2023. 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.
- Article
- Equity-informed social media COVID-19 risk communication strategies: a scoping review.BMJ open · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The popularisation of complex biomedical concepts brought about by COVID-19 has led to the rapid proliferation and diffusion of scientific misinformation, particularly among individuals with inadequate levels of scientific and digital literacy. A cross-sectional online survey of a UK population sample was conducted to address three key aims: to verify whether there is a correlation between participants' belief in false information around COVID-19 and adherence to preventive measures; to investigate whether participants' scientific misinformation and preventive behaviour are associated with their demographic characteristics; and to evaluate whether participants' scientific misinformation and preventive behaviour can predict their likelihood of having contracted COVID-19. Non-parametric data analysis highlighted a strong negative correlation between participants' belief in misinformation and their trust in preventive measures. Both variables were significantly associated with participants' education levels, but not with their religious beliefs. Remarkably, neither science misinformation levels nor the trust in preventive measures were statistically associated with the likelihood of having contracted COVID-19. Taken together, these findings reinforce the urgency of ensuring that the population is equipped with adequate scientific literacy to enable them to evaluate the reliability of scientific information and recognise the importance of individual preventive behaviours to minimise community spread of infectious diseases.
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.