Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37795236›Full record

ArticleJamba (Potchefstroom, South Africa)2023

A structured literature review of the health infodemic on social media in Africa.

Charity Hove, Liezel Cilliers

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Jamba (Potchefstroom, South Africa), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. 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

2 authors.

Charity HoveDepartment of Information Systems, Faculty of Management and Commerce, University of Fort Hare, East London, South Africa.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5579-0992
Liezel CilliersDepartment of Information Systems, Faculty of Management and Commerce, University of Fort Hare, East London, South Africa.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9493-4311

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Infodemics is a multi-faceted threat that needs to be dealt with by governments during public health emergencies. This strategic review described the role of social media platforms in creating and reinforcing an infodemic during health pandemics in Africa. The inclusion criteria for the review were African research on infodemics on social media during pandemics, epidemics or endemics in the past 10 years. A structured literature review, making use of the Sample, Phenomenon of Interest, Design, Evaluation, Research (SPIDER) scoping review methodology framework, identified scholarly publications from various academic databases. A total of 41 articles met the eligibility criteria. The six factors identified included stakeholders, socio-economic context, conspiracy theories, sources of information, government responses and verification mechanisms. The findings of this study indicate that governments needs to include infodemics in the risk communication strategy for public health emergencies. Verification of misinformation can mitigate the effects of conspiracy theories while the socio-economic context of the audience will influence planning strategies to mitigate infodemics on social media. Contribution: This study contributes to the knowledge base of risk communication during pandemics in Africa by providing a review of how infodemics on social media have influenced the COVID-19 pandemic on the continent. The results also provide a foundation for the research agenda in this research field that will provide an evidence-based response to the pandemic in Africa.

Indexed as

AfricaCOVID-19COVID-19 pandemicinfodemicmisinformationrisk communicationsocial media

Identifiers

PMID37795236
PMCPMC10546230

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.