ArticleJMIR infodemiology2024
Perceptions of Health Misinformation on Social Media: Cross-Sectional Survey Study.
Article in JMIR infodemiology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
22 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Older adults and online health misinformation: a systematic literature review.BMC psychology · 2026Pooled it
- Article
- The quality and reliability of short videos about cervical spondylosis on TikTok and Redbook: a cross-sectional study.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2026Article
- Can social media videos meet patients' information needs for benign prostatic hyperplasia? A repeated cross-sectional study.BMC urology · 2026Article
- Characteristics of Human-Like Virtual Profiles in Relation to Audience Reach and Engagement on Instagram: Secondary Data Analysis.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Misinformation and women's health: Rebuilding trust in evidence-based care.International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2026Article
- Perceived Credibility of Health News and Its Relationship with Trust in Physicians and the Health Care System.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Comparison of Feature Selection Methods in Machine Learning Models of Cancer Information Seeking Among United States Adults: Cross-Sectional Study.JMIR medical informatics · 2026Article
- Digital health literacy and infodemic awareness among preschool teachers: skills, behaviors, and determinants.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Perceptions of health misinformation on social media: patterns and predictors.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Health misinformation, digital health literacy, and attitudes toward science among university students: an exploratory cross-sectional survey.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Helpful or harmful? How cancer beliefs and information seeking relate to depression in U.S. adults.PloS one · 2026Article
- Predatory marketing and false health promotion on social media: risk pathways in diet, fitness, and supplement communication.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- YouTube® on carbohydrate counting for diabetes management: a quality and content analysis of Arabic videos.The Journal of the Egyptian Public Health Association · 2025Article
- Viewpoint on the Intersection Among Health Information, Misinformation, and Generative AI Technologies.JMIR infodemiology · 2025Article
- Article
- Navigating the Maze of Social Media Disinformation on Psychiatric Illness and Charting Paths to Reliable Information for Mental Health Professionals: Observational Study of TikTok Videos.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Observational
- Media health literacy predicts preventive health behaviors: findings from a nationally matched survey.Frontiers in digital health · 2025Article
- Article
- Alternative Health and Conventional Medicine Discourse About Cancer on TikTok: Computer Vision Analysis of TikTok Videos.Journal of medical Internet research · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundHealth misinformation on social media can negatively affect knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors, undermining clinical care and public health efforts. Therefore, it is vital to better understand the public's experience with health misinformation on social media.
objectiveThe goal of this analysis was to examine perceptions of the social media information environment and identify associations between health misinformation perceptions and health communication behaviors among US adults.
methodsAnalyses used data from the 2022 Health Information National Trends Survey (N=6252). Weighted unadjusted proportions described respondents' perceptions of the amount of false or misleading health information on social media ("perceived misinformation amount") and how difficult it is to discern true from false information on social media ("perceived discernment difficulty"). Weighted multivariable logistic regressions examined (1) associations of sociodemographic characteristics and subjective literacy measures with misinformation perceptions and (2) relationships between misinformation perceptions and health communication behaviors (ie, sharing personal or general health information on social media and using social media information in health decisions or in discussions with health care providers).
resultsOver one-third of social media users (35.61%) perceived high levels of health misinformation, and approximately two-thirds (66.56%) reported high perceived discernment difficulty. Odds of perceiving high amounts of misinformation were lower among non-Hispanic Black/African American (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.407, 95% CI 0.282-0.587) and Hispanic (aOR 0.610, 95% CI 0.449-0.831) individuals compared to White individuals. Those with lower subjective health literacy were less likely to report high perceived misinformation amount (aOR 0.602, 95% CI 0.374-0.970), whereas those with lower subjective digital literacy were more likely to report high perceived misinformation amount (aOR 1.775, 95% CI 1.400-2.251). Compared to White individuals, Hispanic individuals had lower odds of reporting high discernment difficulty (aOR 0.620, 95% CI 0.462-0.831). Those with lower subjective digital literacy (aOR 1.873, 95% CI 1.478-2.374) or numeracy (aOR 1.465, 95% CI 1.047-2.049) were more likely to report high discernment difficulty. High perceived misinformation amount was associated with lower odds of sharing general health information on social media (aOR 0.742, 95% CI 0.568-0.968), using social media information to make health decisions (aOR 0.273, 95% CI 0.156-0.479), and using social media information in discussions with health care providers (aOR 0.460, 95% CI 0.323-0.655). High perceived discernment difficulty was associated with higher odds of using social media information in health decisions (aOR 1.724, 95% CI 1.208-2.460) and health care provider discussions (aOR 1.389, 95% CI 1.035-1.864).
conclusionsPerceptions of high health misinformation prevalence and discernment difficulty are widespread among social media users, and each has unique associations with sociodemographic characteristics, literacy, and health communication behaviors. These insights can help inform future health communication interventions.
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.