Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40134874›Full record

ReviewPeerJ. Computer science2025

Fake news detection: state-of-the-art review and advances with attention to Arabic language aspects.

Eman Salamah Albtoush, Keng Hoon Gan, Saif A Ahmad Alrababa

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in PeerJ. Computer science, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

3 authors.

Eman Salamah AlbtoushSchool of Computer Sciences, Universiti Sains Malaysia, Gelugor, Malaysia.ORCID 0000-0002-4486-3110
Keng Hoon GanSchool of Computer Sciences, Universiti Sains Malaysia, Gelugor, Malaysia.
Saif A Ahmad AlrababaFaculty of Information Technology, Al al-Bayt University, Mafraq, Jordan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The proliferation of fake news has become a significant threat, influencing individuals, institutions, and societies at large. This issue has been exacerbated by the pervasive integration of social media into daily life, directly shaping opinions, trends, and even the economies of nations. Social media platforms have struggled to mitigate the effects of fake news, relying primarily on traditional methods based on human expertise and knowledge. Consequently, machine learning (ML) and deep learning (DL) techniques now play a critical role in distinguishing fake news, necessitating their extensive deployment to counter the rapid spread of misinformation across all languages, particularly Arabic. Detecting fake news in Arabic presents unique challenges, including complex grammar, diverse dialects, and the scarcity of annotated datasets, along with a lack of research in the field of fake news detection compared to English. This study provides a comprehensive review of fake news, examining its types, domains, characteristics, life cycle, and detection approaches. It further explores recent advancements in research leveraging ML, DL, and transformer-based techniques for fake news detection, with a special attention to Arabic. The research delves into Arabic-specific pre-processing techniques, methodologies tailored for fake news detection in the language, and the datasets employed in these studies. Additionally, it outlines future research directions aimed at developing more effective and robust strategies to address the challenge of fake news detection in Arabic content.

Indexed as

Arabic languageDatasetsDetection approachesFake newsMachine learning

Identifiers

PMID40134874
PMCPMC11935763

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.