ArticleF1000Research2023
Infodemic in Public health a reemerging public health threat: a scoping review.
Article in F1000Research, 2023. 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.
- Infodemic in Public health a reemerging public health threat: a scoping review.F1000Research · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundInfodemic is a neologism of 'information' and 'epidemic' coined in the year 2003. Evidence mapping is a technique to appraise the literature which enables the extent of research activity in a specific area to be discovered. The main objective of this evidence synthesis presents the outcomes of an evidence map that was directed to know the extent of Infodemics and its effects on public health. Methods: The following methods were used to construct this evidence synthesis: Phase I. Construct a Broad Question Referring to the Field of Analysis. Phase II; Defining Key Variables to Be Mapped, identifying the characters of each variable and Outline Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria for the variables. Phase III: Literature search. Phase IV: Screening and Charting the Appropriate Evidence within the Synthesis. Results: Authors identified 55 records through database searching, after screening for duplicates, 53 records screened at title/abstract level of which, 16 records were removed because of lack of complete article or articles were not in English. 37 articles were eligible for full text screening, 37 full-text articles were than assessed for eligibility and only 22 articles were included as per inclusion criteria with an interrater Outcome Kappa value: 0.91. The strength of agreement was considered to be 'excellent'. Conclusions: This synthesis focused majorly on the gaps in the research focused on infodemic. The two main gaps identified were lack of systematically conducted research and poor digital health literacy. As infodemic is a new phenomenon with respect to the COVID-19 pandemic it was an eye opener at different levels of public health, furthermore this evidence map points out areas for further research on the impact of infodemic.
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.