Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40604580›Full record

ArticleBMC public health2025

Trust in doctors, social support, and belief in COVID-19 misinformation.

Urszula A Horoszko, Lindsay Smith, Amy Murphy, Bruce G Taylor, Phoebe A Lamuda, Harold A Pollack, John A Schneider, Faye S Taxman, Xiaoquan Zhao

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in BMC public health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. 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

9 authors.

Urszula A HoroszkoDepartment of Communication, George Mason University, Fairfax, VA, USA.
Lindsay SmithSchar School of Public Policy, George Mason University, Fairfax, VA, USA.
Amy MurphySchar School of Public Policy, George Mason University, Fairfax, VA, USA.
Bruce G TaylorNORC at the University of Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA.
Phoebe A LamudaNORC at the University of Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA.
Harold A PollackCrown Family School of Social Work, Policy, and Practice, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA.
John A SchneiderCrown Family School of Social Work, Policy, and Practice, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA.
Faye S TaxmanSchar School of Public Policy, George Mason University, Fairfax, VA, USA.
Xiaoquan ZhaoDepartment of Communication, George Mason University, Fairfax, VA, USA. xzhao3@gmu.edu.

Funding

Technical Assistance CoreU2CDA050097 · NIDA · GEORGE MASON UNIVERSITY · PI Todd David Molfenter, Jessica Hulsey Nickel · 2019 to 2026
$37.0M
Survey CoreU2CDA050098 · NIDA · UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO · PI POLLACK, HAROLD ALEXANDER, SCHNEIDER, JOHN · 2019 to 2019
$17.2M
NIDA NIH HHS U2C DA050097NIDA NIH HHS U2CDA050097 (PI: FST)NIDA NIH HHS U2C DA050098NIDA NIH HHS U2CDA050098 (PIs: HP and JS)
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMisinformation has emerged as a major concern for public health during the COVID-19 pandemic. Our study conceptualizes trust in doctors and social support through the lens of social capital theory and investigates their role in public endorsement of COVID-19-related misinformation.

methodsUsing data from a nationally representative survey (N = 6,515), a series of logistic regression models were used to estimate relationships between misinformation endorsement and trust in doctors and social support from interpersonal and communal sources. Moderation analyses explored differences in these relationships among non-Hispanic White, non-Hispanic Black, and Hispanic respondents.

resultsIn the full sample analysis, trust in doctors and social support from both sources were negatively associated with misinformation endorsement. This pattern did not consistently hold across the three subgroups in moderation analyses. Trust in doctors was negatively associated with misinformation endorsement in most cases, whereas social support exhibited varied associations depending on its source and respondents' race and ethnicity.

conclusionsThese findings confirm that trust in doctors is an important protective factor against COVID-19 misinformation. The role of social support, however, is more nuanced and warrants continued research that considers both support sources and the racial and ethnic background of the communities involved.

Indexed as

CommunicationCOVID-19PhysiciansSocial SupportTrustAdultAgedBlack or African AmericanFemaleHispanic or LatinoHumansMaleMiddle AgedSurveys and QuestionnairesUnited StatesWhiteCOVID-19Health disparitiesHealth equityMisinformationSocial capitalSocial supportTrust

Identifiers

PMID40604580
PMCPMC12220512

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.