SynthesisBMC psychology2026
Older adults and online health misinformation: a systematic literature review.
Synthesis in BMC psychology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Age differences in susceptibility to stroke-related health misinformation on social media: the role of prior experience and corrective feedback.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Analysis of latent profiles and influencing factors of information overload in day surgery patients.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- From emergence to amplification: an analysis of lifecycle models to address health mis-disinformation in the digital environment.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Review
- Quality and reliability of myelodysplastic syndromes-related health information on Chinese short-video platforms: a multi-platform cross-sectional analysis.Frontiers in digital 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
As older adults increasingly rely on the internet for health-related information, concerns about their vulnerability to online health misinformation have intensified. This systematic literature review synthesizes findings from 26 empirical studies published between 2000 and 2024 to examine how older adults interact with health misinformation in digital contexts. The review identifies a complex interplay of factors contributing to their susceptibility, including cognitive decline, gaps in digital and health literacy, emotional and psychological influences, and the role of social relationships. However, most studies lack theoretical grounding, platform-specific analysis, and geographical diversity. Conceptual inconsistencies and a COVID-19 research bias further limit generalizability. The review calls for clearer definitions, interdisciplinary approaches, and targeted interventions to address this urgent public health issue and provide a foundation for designing more targeted and effective interventions.
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.