ArticlePLOS global public health2026
Medical misinformation in Lebanese media: A qualitative study of Stakeholders' perspectives and policy gaps.
Article in PLOS global public health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Medical misinformation in Lebanese media: A qualitative study of Stakeholders' perspectives and policy gaps.PLOS global public health · 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The spread of medical misinformation through conventional and online communication poses a public health risk, especially in countries like Lebanon, where the healthcare system is fragile. Its dangers were highlighted during the COVID-19 pandemic and other health emergencies, showing how inaccurate or misleading information can alter public health behavior. Despite growing awareness about the problem, no study in Lebanon has explored health misinformation from the perspective of key healthcare stakeholders. The aim of this study was to investigate the views of key stakeholders on the causes and implications of health-related misinformation in Lebanese media, and to provide recommendations to combat it. We conducted a qualitative study using semi-structured, in-depth interviews with nine elite interviewees from the media, health sector, government, professional syndicates, and legal system. Interviews were conducted between March 17 and 25, 2025 and thematically analyzed using an inductive-deductive approach. Data saturation was reached at the eighth interview. Trustworthiness was ascertained through triangulated coding, reflexivity, and adherence to established qualitative rigor criteria. Factors contributing to the spread of health misinformation included low health literacy, poverty, political pressure on the media, and a lack of regulations on digital platforms. WhatsApp, Facebook, and Instagram were identified as major channels for rapid dissemination. Although some Lebanese media outlets practiced voluntary fact-checking and consulted experts, these efforts remained intermittent and unenforced. Government responses were described as reactive, relying more on public credibility than legislation. Existing health legislation was seen as outdated, weakly enforced, and disconnected from digital realities. The COVID-19 pandemic exposed these vulnerabilities and highlighted the need for coordinated broadcasting approach and stronger expert oversight across media platforms. Medical misinformation in Lebanon is driven by structural weaknesses across media, health, and legal systems. Addressing it requires coordinated institutional action, improved health literacy, stronger collaboration between media and health professionals, and updated regulations suited to the digital era.
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.