ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2025
Online Interventions Addressing Health Misinformation: Scoping Review.
Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Understanding Organic Food Purchase Intention and Adoption in Türkiye: The Roles of Health, Sustainability, Product Information, and Social Media.Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Factors Associated With Nurses' Self-Reported Susceptibility to Online Health Misinformation: Evidence From Greece.International nursing review · 2026Observational
- Development and Preliminary Evaluation of the OCODES Digital Strategy in Response to Health Misinformation: Nominal Group Technique and Retrospective Usability Evaluation Study.JMIR formative research · 2026Article
- As Social Media Scales Back Fact-Checking, Can Technologies Fill the Gap?Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Cross-Cultural Differences in Public Discourse on COVID-19 Vaccination in the United States and South Korea: Cross-Sectional Analysis Using Natural Language Processing.JMIR formative research · 2026Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMisinformation in health and health care contexts threatens public health by undermining initiatives, spreading dangerous behaviors, and influencing decision-making. Given its reach on online platforms and social media, there is growing demand for interventions addressing misinformation. Literature highlights the importance of theoretical underpinnings (frameworks and models) to guide the development of educational interventions targeting both the features of misinformation and the human traits that increase susceptibility.
objectiveThis review examines literature on online interventions targeting health misinformation to mitigate adverse public health impacts. It explores intervention types, population demographics, susceptibility-related human attributes, and misinformation characteristics addressed. It also identifies the theoretical underpinnings used and gaps in the literature.
methodsThe review followed a methodological framework and adhered to PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews) guidelines. A search strategy combining Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) and keywords was used to search five databases for studies published between 2018 and 2024. Identified studies underwent deduplication, title and abstract screening using predefined eligibility criteria, full-text screening, and data extraction.
resultsThe initial search yielded 513 citations; 30 (5.8%) studies were included after screening. Of these, 19 (63%) focused on COVID-19 misinformation, 11 (37%) on other health contexts, and 1 (3%) addressed misinformation conceptually. Regarding intervention type, 22 (73%) used educational courses, 7 (23%) employed counter speech, and 1 (3%) used inoculation games, with some overlap. Sixteen (53%) interventions targeted characteristics of misinformation, categorized as content and presentation tactics, cognitive and psychological biases, social and cultural influences, and dissemination strategies. Seven (23%) interventions focused on specific demographics, while 14 (47%) addressed human attributes that heighten susceptibility. These attributes were grouped into knowledge and processing, emotional and psychological factors, and trust and social dynamics. Theoretical underpinnings guided intervention development in 23 (77%) studies, often overlapping in categories including inoculation and correction, education and cognition, motivation and emotion, behavior and persuasion, trust and belief, and learning design.
conclusionsOnline interventions targeting health misinformation often share outcome goals and use overlapping strategies such as educational courses, counter speech, and inoculation games. Many adopt multifaceted approaches to address misinformation's complexity. However, gaps remain in tailoring interventions to misinformation characteristics that could improve specificity and impact. Few studies focus on human attributes contributing to belief in and spread of misinformation, particularly among vulnerable groups. While theoretical models are commonly cited, clearer reporting and stronger connections to intervention design are needed. Collaboration among intervention developers, theorists, and psychologists is recommended to enhance future interventions. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): RR2-10.31219/osf.io/mfujb.
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.