ArticleJMIR infodemiology2026
Multilayered Epistemic Disruption in AI-Driven Health Misinformation: Conceptual Framework and Viewpoint.
Article in JMIR infodemiology, 2026. 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
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Unlabelled: Generative AI has transformed the health information ecosystem by enabling scalable, sophisticated health misinformation production at near-zero marginal cost. Current literature addresses AI's role in health misinformation predominantly through a binary threat detection framework, systematically overlooking the structural, multilayered mechanisms through which AI simultaneously embeds false claims across intersecting human trust systems. This paper introduces the Multilayered Epistemic Disruption Framework (MEDF), which conceptualizes how AI-driven health misinformation structurally undermines public trust through four interdependent layers of cognitive and institutional disruption: discursive (clinical language shielding: fluent medical terminology and fabricated citations deployed as credibility signals), biometric (embodied authority transfer: deepfake appropriation of real clinicians' faces and voices), temporal (the synthetic chorus effect: near-simultaneous fabrication of apparently independent corroborating sources), and systemic (structural epistemic erosion: cumulative macro-level collapse of trust in medical institutions). Adopting a socioecological and structural epistemic approach, this viewpoint synthesizes empirical findings from communication psychology, medical sociology, and digital infodemiology, and the MEDF is explicitly positioned relative to established health communication frameworks, including the i-frame and s-frame distinction (individual-level vs system-level intervention targets) and socioecological infodemic models, with each construct's novelty defined in relation to adjacent concepts in prior literature. The MEDF proposes that AI-driven health misinformation is distinctively dangerous due to its capacity to exploit variable individual receptivity to medical authority claims and to simultaneously lower epistemic thresholds across multiple trust layers. Population-level data indicate that individuals who frequently encounter health misinformation on social media are 1.66 times more likely to report systemic distrust of health care institutions (odds ratio 1.66, 95% CI 1.11-2.48). Perceptual studies document that listeners correctly identify AI-generated voice clones only about 60% of the time and perceive a cloned voice as identical to its real counterpart in approximately 80% of trials. Existing defenses-including Content Provenance and Authenticity standards, automated deepfake detection (showing area under the curve drops of up to 50% under real-world conditions), and prebunking interventions-are shown to address only subsets of the proposed cascade, leaving temporal and systemic layers substantially unmitigated. Four testable hypotheses are advanced for empirical validation. Addressing AI-driven health misinformation requires moving beyond individual-level i-frame interventions toward structural, s-frame policy responses calibrated to each layer of the MEDF cascade. Policymakers and platforms must implement source identity verification, clinician biometric protection protocols, cross-platform ecosystem governance, and proactive trust infrastructure, with particular urgency in lower- and middle-income country contexts where regulatory capacity and platform oversight are most limited.
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.