Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40554777›Full record

ArticleJMIR infodemiology2025

How the General Public Navigates Health Misinformation on Social Media: Qualitative Study of Identification and Response Approaches.

Sharmila Sathianathan, Adliah Mhd Ali, Wei Wen Chong

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR infodemiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Observational
  2. Review
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.

Sharmila Sathianathan *Centre of Quality Management of Medicines, Faculty of Pharmacy, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.ORCID 0000-0003-4847-1744
Adliah Mhd Ali *Centre of Quality Management of Medicines, Faculty of Pharmacy, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.ORCID 0000-0003-1306-8330
Wei Wen Chong *Centre of Quality Management of Medicines, Faculty of Pharmacy, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.ORCID 0000-0002-6036-8478

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSocial media is widely used by the general public as a source of health information because of its convenience. However, the increasing prevalence of health misinformation on social media is becoming a serious concern, and it remains unclear how the general public identifies and responds to it.

objectiveThis study aims to explore the approaches used by the general public for identifying and responding to health misinformation on social media.

methodsSemistructured interviews were conducted with 22 respondents from the Malaysian general public. The theory of motivated information management was used as a guiding framework for conducting the interviews. Audio-taped interviews were transcribed verbatim and imported into ATLAS.ti software for analysis. Themes were identified from the qualitative data using a thematic analysis method.

resultsThe 3 main themes identified were emotional responses and impacts of health misinformation, approaches used to identify health misinformation, and responses to health misinformation. The spread of health misinformation through social media platforms has caused uncertainty and triggered a range of emotional responses, including anxiety and feelings of vulnerability, among respondents who encountered it. The approaches to identifying health misinformation on social media included examining message characteristics and sources. Messages were deemed to be misinformation if they contradicted credible sources or exhibited illogical and exaggerated content. Respondents described multiple response approaches to health misinformation based on the situation. Verification was chosen if the information was deemed important, while misinformation was often ignored to avoid conflict. Respondents were compelled to take action if misinformation affected their family members, had been corrected by others, or if they were knowledgeable about the topic. Taking action involved correcting the misinformation and reporting the misinformation to relevant social media, enforcement authorities, and government bodies.

conclusionsThis study highlights the factors and motivations influencing the general public's identification and response to health misinformation on social media. Addressing the challenges of health misinformation identified in this study requires collaborative efforts from all stakeholders to reduce the spread of health misinformation and reduce the general public's belief in it.

Indexed as

CommunicationSocial MediaAdultFemaleHumansInterviews as TopicMalaysiaMaleMiddle AgedQualitative ResearchYoung Adultapproachesgeneral publichealth misinformationresponsesocial media

Identifiers

PMID40554777
PMCPMC12238787

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.