ArticlePLOS mental health2024
COVID-19's myths, facts, concerning and obstinate posts on social network, and the mental health status of social network users in Bangladesh.
Article in PLOS mental health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Myths, misinformation, facts like posts spread by social media during COVID-19 pandemic had an enormous effect on psychological health. This study aimed to investigate social media based COVID-19's posts and the psychological health status of participants. A cross-sectional, online survey-based study was conducted in between April to October 2021 using a structured and semi-structured questionnaire, predominantly involving 1200 active social network users in Bangladesh. Depression, anxiety, and stress were assessed using the Depression, Anxiety, and Stress Scale (DASS-21), while the Insomnia Severity Index (ISI) measured insomnia severity for selected participants. Internal reliabilities were calculated with Cronbach's alpha coefficients (cut-off point 0.70). Unrelated multivariate logistic regression explored correlations among outcome errors, with the model assessing the impact of selected independent variables on mental health. The findings demonstrated that 27.8% individuals spread facts whereas 7.4% spread myths and misinformation about COVID-19 on social networks. Furthermore, 28.1% and 36.7% shared obstinate and concerning posts respectively. The prevalence of depression, anxiety and stress symptoms, ranging from mild to extremely severe, were 43.9%, 30.9%, and 23.8% respectively. However, 2.8% had severe level of insomnia. Facts, myths, tour attending, and no mask group photos were significantly associated with anxiety, and less likelihood of experiencing anxiety. Interestingly, circulating such activities on social networks had no significant association with depression, stress, or insomnia. The spread of misinformation on social media undermines any efforts to contain COVID-19 infection. The findings hugely recommend of using fact checking facilities and adaptation to the pandemic situations to maintain lower prevalence of depression, anxiety, stress and insomnia.
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.