Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39208420›Full record

ArticleJMIR infodemiology2024

Ethical Considerations in Infodemic Management: Systematic Scoping Review.

Federico Germani, Giovanni Spitale, Sandra Varaidzo Machiri, Calvin Wai Loon Ho, Isabella Ballalai, Nikola Biller-Andorno, Andreas Alois Reis

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

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 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing 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

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. 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

7 authors.

Federico Germani *Institute of Biomedical Ethics and History of Medicine, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0002-5604-0437
Giovanni Spitale *Institute of Biomedical Ethics and History of Medicine, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0002-6812-0979
Sandra Varaidzo MachiriUnit for High Impact Events Preparedness, Department of Epidemic and Pandemic Preparedness and Prevention, World Health Organization, Genève, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0001-8440-1028
Calvin Wai Loon HoMonash Law School, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-8328-1308
Isabella BallalaiBrazilian Immunization Society, Sao Paolo, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0001-6285-9257
Nikola Biller-AndornoInstitute of Biomedical Ethics and History of Medicine, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0001-7661-1324
Andreas Alois ReisHealth Ethics and Governance Unit, Department of Research for Health, World Health Organization, Genève, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0002-8218-2615

Funding

World Health Organization 001
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDuring health emergencies, effective infodemic management has become a paramount challenge. A new era marked by a rapidly changing information ecosystem, combined with the widespread dissemination of misinformation and disinformation, has magnified the complexity of the issue. For infodemic management measures to be effective, acceptable, and trustworthy, a robust framework of ethical considerations is needed.

objectiveThis systematic scoping review aims to identify and analyze ethical considerations and procedural principles relevant to infodemic management, ultimately enhancing the effectiveness of these practices and increasing trust in stakeholders performing infodemic management practices with the goal of safeguarding public health.

methodsThe review involved a comprehensive examination of the literature related to ethical considerations in infodemic management from 2002 to 2022, drawing from publications in PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science. Policy documents and relevant material were included in the search strategy. Papers were screened against inclusion and exclusion criteria, and core thematic areas were systematically identified and categorized following PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. We analyzed the literature to identify substantive ethical principles that were crucial for guiding actions in the realms of infodemic management and social listening, as well as related procedural ethical principles. In this review, we consider ethical principles that are extensively deliberated upon in the literature, such as equity, justice, or respect for autonomy. However, we acknowledge the existence and relevance of procedural practices, which we also consider as ethical principles or practices that, when implemented, enhance the efficacy of infodemic management while ensuring the respect of substantive ethical principles.

resultsDrawing from 103 publications, the review yielded several key findings related to ethical principles, approaches, and guidelines for practice in the context of infodemic management. Community engagement, empowerment through education, and inclusivity emerged as procedural principles and practices that enhance the quality and effectiveness of communication and social listening efforts, fostering trust, a key emerging theme and crucial ethical principle. The review also emphasized the significance of transparency, privacy, and cybersecurity in data collection.

conclusionsThis review underscores the pivotal role of ethics in bolstering the efficacy of infodemic management. From the analyzed body of literature, it becomes evident that ethical considerations serve as essential instruments for cultivating trust and credibility while also facilitating the medium-term and long-term viability of infodemic management approaches.

Indexed as

Health Information ManagementHumanscommunity engagementdata privacydisinformationeffectivenessempowermentethical principlesethicshealth emergencieshealth emergencyinfodemicinfodemic managementmisinformationreviewscoping reviewsocial listeningWorld Health Organization

Identifiers

PMID39208420
PMCPMC11393515

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.