ArticleOpen research Europe2025
Preventive Strategies Against Disinformation: A Study on Digital and Information Literacy Activities Led by Fact-Checking Organisations.
Article in Open research Europe, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- PROTOCOL: Interventions Targeting Misinformation, Disinformation and Malinformation for Reducing and Countering Violent Extremism: A Systematic Review.Campbell systematic reviews · 2026Review
- Preventive Strategies Against Disinformation: A Study on Digital and Information Literacy Activities Led by Fact-Checking Organisations.Open research Europe · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Disinformation represents a critical threat to our democratic societies, particularly considering the role of new technologies such as generative artificial intelligence in the creation and dissemination of content, as well as the challenges involved in its detection. Among the strategies to combat disinformation, debunking, along with media and digital literacy, are the preferred approaches for the EU. Methods: This research examines the role of fact-checking organizations in promoting digital and media literacy. An analysis on the websites of a sample of 88 organizations with membership in the International Fact-Checking Network (IFCN) was conducted. The aim was to identify and classify their activities related to various literacies aimed at mitigating disinformation. Data collection was carried out across two distinct time periods. Results: Findings revealed a moderate reach of these activities, with 48.6% implementation and a 60% increase since the last period analyzed (December 2022). The study concludes that: 1) there are differences in the level of adoption across different regions; 2) strategies are adapted to various target audiences, reflecting sociodemographic factors; and 3) fact-checkers serve as valuable and necessary links for the most groups outside formal education systems. Conclusion: These activities are strongly reliant on externally funded projects and programs, rather than representing an independent and sustainable business model. Therefore, it is recommended to promote and expand these funding streams. The value of these initiatives lies in their potential to reach vulnerable groups who are excluded from formal education systems.
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.