ArticleCureus2024
Exploring How People Interact With Dental Misinformation on Social Media: A Cross-Sectional Study.
Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 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
17 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Dental Caries Experience (DMFT) and Oral Hygiene Status Among 18-Year-Old Adolescents in Two Bulgarian Municipalities: A Cross-Sectional Study.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Review
- Health Literacy and Oral Health Behaviors Among Dental Medicine Students: A Cross-Sectional Study.Dentistry journal · 2026Article
- Measuring Digital Oral Health Literacy in the Social Media Era: Psychometric Validation of the Romanian Version of the Social Media Oral Health Literacy Questionnaire (SMOHLQ).Dentistry journal · 2026Article
- Factors influencing dentists' choice of restorative materials for occlusal cavities: a cross-sectional study from Palestine.BMJ open · 2026Observational
- Inequalities in Dental Caries Among Primary Schoolchildren in Saudi Arabia: A Cross-Sectional Study.Cureus · 2026Article
- Article
- Assessing Dental Anxiety in Naïve Patients: Development and Validation of the Naïve Dental Anxiety Scale (NDAS).Cureus · 2026Article
- Article
- Impact of Mobile Oral Health Applications on Pediatric Dental Anxiety: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.Cureus · 2026Review
- Academic Integrity and Cheating in Dental Education: Prevalence, Drivers, and Career Implications.Dentistry journal · 2026Review
- Patients' Knowledge and Perceptions Towards Digital Technologies in Dentistry: A Cross-Sectional Study.Dentistry journal · 2025Article
- Article
- Review
- Evaluation of the Quality and Readability of ChatGPT Responses to Toothache Queries: A Study Based on Google Trends.Cureus · 2025Article
- First insight into oral health misinformation in Jordan; an analysis of web content and information-seeking behaviors.PloS one · 2025Article
- Analyzing patient perspectives on orthodontic treatment through social media hashtags.PloS one · 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
7 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSocial media has been widely utilized to spread health-related information, which has led to the possibility of spreading medical misinformation. The extent of the issue is unknown, even though policymakers, researchers, and medical professionals agree that health misinformation must be controlled and combated.
objectiveA cross-sectional study was conducted by the faculty of dentistry at Damascus University.
methodsThis quantitative cross-sectional study used a voluntary questionnaire distributed online in social media groups. Participants were of different ages, genders, and educational levels.
resultsOf the 301 questionnaires collected, 291 were analyzed. The study sample comprised secondary education certificates, university students, and postgraduate students. 96.6% of the study sample used two or more SM applications. 71.5% of the study sample uses Facebook more than other applications for dental information research, followed by Instagram (14.8%), Telegram (8.2%), and finally WhatsApp (5.5%). There was a significant difference between the age of the respondents and the SM application they used most (p = 0.027). 46.4% of the study sample were neutral in their answer about what they believed in the trust of information on SM sites, followed by 42.3% who did not agree with the trust of information on SM sites and 11.3 who agreed. 89.7% of the study sample visit the dentist when facing a medical problem, while 10.3% follow advice on SM sites. There was a significant difference between the age of respondents and the source they relied on when facing a medical problem (p = 0.019). 50.2% of the study sample sometimes feels that the advice on SM sites is marketing for a company or product or advertising for doctors and not others.
conclusionIn particular, understanding the methods and prevalence of health misinformation, as well as the current gaps in knowledge in this area, will help us to guide future research and, more specifically, to develop evidence-based digital policy action plans targeted at addressing this public health issue through various social media platforms.
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.