ReviewThe American psychologist
Using psychological science to understand and fight health misinformation: An APA consensus statement.
Review in The American psychologist. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 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
14 citing papers in PubMed.
- Factors Associated With Nurses' Self-Reported Susceptibility to Online Health Misinformation: Evidence From Greece.International nursing review · 2026Observational
- Development and validation of a tool for detecting misinformation risk in diet, nutrition, and health content (Diet-MisRAT).Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Video inoculation against election misinformation across 12 EU nations.Communications psychology · 2026Article
- ERS Congress 2025: highlights from the Allied Respiratory Professionals Assembly.ERJ open research · 2026Article
- Misinformation on cardiovascular disease spreads through social networks: a scoping review.BMJ public health · 2026Article
- Susceptibility to digital health misinformation: a multi-level narrative review.Frontiers in public health · 2026Review
- Misinformation and disinformation undermine progress in pediatric research: challenges and solutions.Pediatric research · 2025Article
- Article
- The Online Misinformation Susceptibility Scale: Development and Initial Validation.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Concerns Regarding the Methodology of a Psychological Inoculation Meta-Analysis on Misinformation.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- Strategies for Effective Public Health Communication in a Complex Information Environment.Annual review of public health · 2025Review
- Beyond misinformation: developing a public health prevention framework for managing information ecosystems.The Lancet. Public health · 2024Review
- Processing of misinformation as motivational and cognitive biases.Frontiers in psychology · 2024Article
- Impact of Cybersecurity Self-Efficacy on Digital Economic Behaviors Among Older Adults.Inquiry : a journal of medical care organization, provision and financingArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
There is widespread concern that misinformation poses dangerous risks to health, well-being, and civic life. Despite a growing body of research on the topic, significant questions remain about the psychological factors that render people susceptible to misinformation, the extent to which it affects real-world behavior, how it spreads online and offline, and intervention strategies that counter and correct misinformation effectively. This report reviews the best available psychological science research to reach consensus on each of these crucial questions, particularly as they pertain to health-related misinformation. In addition, the report offers eight specific recommendations for scientists, policymakers, and health professionals who seek to recognize and respond to misinformation in healthcare and beyond. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2026 APA, all rights reserved).
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.