ArticleHealth education research2025
Correction approaches and hashtag framing in addressing Mpox misinformation on Instagram.
Article in Health education research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Mpox Awareness and Knowledge Among Residents of the Northern Border Region, Saudi Arabia: Implications for Community Preparedness.Journal of community health · 2026Article
- Why Sexual Choking Is Not as Safe as You Think: A Call to Action from Sex Researchers and Kink Educators.Archives of sexual behavior · 2026Review
- Addressing misleading medical information on social media: a scoping review of current interventions.BMJ evidence-based medicine · 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The rapid spread of health misinformation on social media poses significant challenges to public health crisis. Mpox misinformation has portrayed it as exclusively a sexually transmitted infection, resulting in misperceptions about infection risk and stigmatization of affected groups. This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of different correction approaches and message framing in reducing misperception and shaping disease-related attitudes, both immediately after exposure and after a 1-day delay. We employed a 2 × 2 design with a control group to test correction approaches (fact-based vs. logic-based) combined with hashtag framing (health literacy vs. inclusivity) through an experiment (N = 274). Findings showed that all corrections reduced misperception both immediately and after 1 day and increased the likelihood of sharing corrective messages. Only corrections with inclusivity hashtags promoted more positive attitudes towards Mpox immediately after exposure. Stereotypes played a significant moderating role where participants with stronger stereotypes showed a greater reduction in misperception when exposed to corrections with inclusivity hashtags but were less likely to share logic-based corrective message. These findings contributed to understanding effective health communication by highlighting the role of social media hashtags in message framing, promoting user sharing of corrective information, and addressing stereotypes when designing interventions against health misinformation.
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.