Infodemics and health misinformation: a systematic review of reviews

Abstract

Objective To compare and summarize the literature regarding infodemics and health misinformation, and to identify challenges and opportunities for addressing the issues of infodemics. Methods We searched MEDLINE®, Embase®, Cochrane Library of Systematic Reviews, Scopus and Epistemonikos on 6 May 2022 for systematic reviews analysing infodemics, misinformation, disinformation and fake news related to health. We grouped studies based on similarity and retrieved evidence on challenges and opportunities. We used the AMSTAR 2 approach to assess the reviews’ methodological quality. To evaluate the quality of the evidence, we used the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation guidelines. Findings Our search identified 31 systematic reviews, of which 17 were published. The proportion of health-related misinformation on social media ranged from 0.2% to 28.8%. Twitter, Facebook, YouTube and Instagram are critical in disseminating the rapid and far-reaching information. The most negative consequences of health misinformation are the increase of misleading or incorrect interpretations of available evidence, impact on mental health, misallocation of health resources and an increase in vaccination hesitancy. The increase of unreliable health information delays care provision and increases the occurrence of hateful and divisive rhetoric. Social media could also be a useful tool to combat misinformation during crises. Included reviews highlight the poor quality of published studies during health crises. Conclusion Available evidence suggests that infodemics during health emergencies have an adverse effect on society. Multisectoral actions to counteract infodemics and health misinformation are needed, including developing legal policies, creating and promoting awareness campaigns, improving health-related content in mass media and increasing people’s digital and health literacy.

Susceptibility to COVID-19 Nutrition Misinformation and Eating Behavior Change during Lockdowns: An International Web-Based Survey

“…held more misinformed views across all 25 statements ( Figure 2 ). Aside from these sources being commonly held responsible for spreading misinformation and for amplified misinformation vulnerability [ 1 , 15 , 136 , 137 , 138 , 139 , 140 , 141 ], personal factors such as lower levels of health literacy cannot be discounted [ 142 , 143 ]. Research has indicated that individuals with health literacy deficiencies are more prone to use non-scientific sources such as television, social media, blogs, or celebrity webpages [ 144 , 145 ] and more susceptible to health misinformation [ 136 ].…”

“…If the source used for dietary change contains more hazardous, unsafe, or riskier misinformation, then there is a higher risk of health harm [ 146 ]. This underscores the need for educational and communication initiatives to counter misinformation and disinformation exposure and impact, through such approaches as targeted warnings, awareness campaigns, and correction strategies, alongside policy-, technological-, and regulatory-level interventions [ 1 ].…”

“…The early period of the COVID-19 pandemic was widely seen as a terrifying period of time because of distressing uncertainties and limited knowledge about transmission and protection, with social fear, panic, and anxiety being exacerbated by misinformation and disinformation exposure [ 1 , 2 , 3 ]. Indeed, this time was characterized by little to an inexistent understanding about contagion odds via food, packaging, surfaces and air, virus survival time, viral load, prevention, treatment, severity, duration, and the role of diet, food, and nutrition.…”

“…Numerous international reviews have assessed the sources of health misinformation propagation, with the highest proportion of health misinformation spread through social media platforms (most prominently Facebook, followed by WhatsApp instant messages), popular personalities, and mainstream media [ 1 , 15 ]. However, the extent of COVID-19 nutrition and health misinformation held by individuals has been less clear.…”

Lesson on Misinformation in the COVID-19 Era

“…On the other hand, for anti-criminalization supporters, creating policies controlling health misinformation and disinformation goes against freedom of speech and a free flow of information. Countermeasures that would suit both points of view can be awareness campaigns for patients and health-care professionals, the creation and dissemination of easy-to-navigate platforms with evidencebased data, the improvement of health-related content in the mass media by using high-quality scientific evidence, the increase of high-quality online health information and improved of media literacy [43].…”