Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38566799›Full record

SynthesisFrontiers in public health2024

Management of infodemics in outbreaks or health crises: a systematic review.

Lamis Abuhaloob, Tina D Purnat, Celine Tabche, Zeenah Atwan, Elizabeth Dubois, Salman Rawaf

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Frontiers in public health, 2024. 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. Article
  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

6 authors.

Lamis AbuhaloobFaculty of Medicine, WHO Collaborating Centre for Public Health Education and Training, School of Public Health, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom.
Tina D PurnatUniversity of Memphis School of Public Health, Memphis, TN, United States.
Celine TabcheFaculty of Medicine, WHO Collaborating Centre for Public Health Education and Training, School of Public Health, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom.
Zeenah AtwanDepartment of Microbiology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Al-Basra, Al-Basra, Iraq.
Elizabeth DuboisFaculty of Medicine, WHO Collaborating Centre for Public Health Education and Training, School of Public Health, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom.
Salman RawafFaculty of Medicine, WHO Collaborating Centre for Public Health Education and Training, School of Public Health, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: The World Health Organization (WHO) defined an infodemic as an overabundance of information, accurate or not, in the digital and physical space, accompanying an acute health event such as an outbreak or epidemic. It can impact people's risk perceptions, trust, and confidence in the health system, and health workers. As an immediate response, the WHO developed the infodemic management (IM) frameworks, research agenda, intervention frameworks, competencies, and processes for reference by health authorities. Objective: This systematic review explored the response to and during acute health events by health authorities and other organizations operating in health. It also assessed the effectiveness of the current interventions. Methods: On 26 June 2023, an online database search included Medline (Ovid), Embase, Cochrane Library, Scopus, Epistemonikos, and the WHO website. It included English-only, peer-reviewed studies or reports covering IM processes applied by health organizations that reported their effectiveness. There was no restriction on publication dates. Two independent reviewers conducted all screening, inclusion, and quality assessments, and a third reviewer arbitrated any disagreement between the two reviewers. Results: Reviewers identified 945 records. After a final assessment, 29 studies were included in the review and were published between 2021 and 2023. Some countries (Pakistan, Yemen, Spain, Italy, Hong Kong, Japan, South Korea, Singapore, United Kingdom, United States, New Zealand, Finland, South Korea, and Russia) applied different methods of IM to people's behaviors. These included but were not limited to launching media and TV conservations, using web and scientific database searches, posting science-based COVID-19 information, implementing online surveys, and creating an innovative ecosystem of digital tools, and an Early AI-supported response with Social Listening (EARS) platform. Most of the interventions were effective in containing the harmful effects of COVID-19 infodemic. However, the quality of the evidence was not robust. Discussion: Most of the infodemic interventions applied during COVID-19 fall within the recommended actions of the WHO IM ecosystem. As a result, the study suggests that more research is needed into the challenges facing health systems in different operational environments and country contexts in relation to designing, implementing, and evaluating IM interventions, strategies, policies, and systems.

Indexed as

COVID-19EpidemicsDisease OutbreaksHumansInfodemicCOVID-19health crisishealth emergencyinfodemicinfodemic managementinfodemiologymisinformationoutbreak

Identifiers

PMID38566799
PMCPMC10986759

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.