ArticlePloS one2023
Trend analysis of COVID-19 mis/disinformation narratives-A 3-year study.
Article in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Misinformation Through the Lens of Dutch News Media and Public Health Authorities: Content Analysis of Topics and Narratives Present in Pandemic-Related Misinformation During COVID-19.JMIR infodemiology · 2026Article
- Development and Preliminary Evaluation of the OCODES Digital Strategy in Response to Health Misinformation: Nominal Group Technique and Retrospective Usability Evaluation Study.JMIR formative research · 2026Article
- Public Health Communication Challenges in Eastern Europe and Central Asia: A Scoping Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2025Article
- A scoping review of natural language processing in addressing medically inaccurate information: Errors, misinformation, and hallucination.Journal of biomedical informatics · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To tackle the COVID-19 infodemic, we analysed 58,625 articles from 460 unverified sources, that is, sources that were indicated by fact checkers and other mis/disinformation experts as frequently spreading mis/disinformation, covering the period from 1 January 2020 to 31 December 2022. Our aim was to identify the main narratives of COVID-19 mis/disinformation, develop a codebook, automate the process of narrative classification by training an automatic classifier, and analyse the spread of narratives over time and across countries. Articles were retrieved with a customised version of the Europe Media Monitor (EMM) processing chain providing a stream of text items. Machine translation was employed to automatically translate non-English text to English and clustering was carried out to group similar articles. A multi-level codebook of COVID-19 mis/disinformation narratives was developed following an inductive approach; a transformer-based model was developed to classify all text items according to the codebook. Using the transformer-based model, we identified 12 supernarratives that evolved over the three years studied. The analysis shows that there are often real events behind mis/disinformation trends, which unverified sources misrepresent or take out of context. We established a process that allows for near real-time monitoring of COVID-19 mis/disinformation. This experience will be useful to analyse mis/disinformation about other topics, such as climate change, migration, and geopolitical developments.
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.