Mitigating Health and Science Misinformation: A Scoping Review of Literature from 2017 to 2022.

IF 3 3区 医学 Q1 COMMUNICATION
Health Communication Pub Date : 2025-01-01 Epub Date: 2024-03-27 DOI:10.1080/10410236.2024.2332817
Kathryn Heley, Wen-Ying Sylvia Chou, Heather D'Angelo, Nicole Senft Everson, Abigail Muro, Jacob A Rohde, Anna Gaysynsky
{"title":"Mitigating Health and Science Misinformation: A Scoping Review of Literature from 2017 to 2022.","authors":"Kathryn Heley, Wen-Ying Sylvia Chou, Heather D'Angelo, Nicole Senft Everson, Abigail Muro, Jacob A Rohde, Anna Gaysynsky","doi":"10.1080/10410236.2024.2332817","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Literature on how to address misinformation has rapidly expanded in recent years. The aim of this scoping review was to synthesize the growing published literature on health and science misinformation mitigation interventions. English-language articles published from January 2017 to July 2022 were included. After title/abstract screening, 115 publications (148 empirical studies) met inclusion criteria and were coded for sample characteristics, topics, mitigation strategies, research methods, outcomes, and intervention efficacy. A marked increase in misinformation mitigation research was observed in 2020-2022. COVID-19, vaccines, and climate change were the most frequently addressed topics. Most studies used general population samples recruited online; few focused on populations most vulnerable to misinformation. Most studies assessed cognitive outcomes (e.g., knowledge), with fewer assessing health behavior, communication behavior, or skills. Correction (k = 97) was the most used misinformation mitigation strategy, followed by education and other literacy initiatives (k = 39) and prebunking/inoculation (k = 24). Intervention efficacy varied, with 76 studies reporting positive, 17 reporting null, and 68 reporting mixed results. Most misinformation mitigation interventions were limited to short-term online experiments focused on improving cognitive outcomes. Priority research areas going forward include expanding and diversifying study samples, scaling interventions, conducting longitudinal observations, and focusing on communities susceptible to misinformation.</p>","PeriodicalId":12889,"journal":{"name":"Health Communication","volume":" ","pages":"79-89"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health Communication","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10410236.2024.2332817","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/3/27 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"COMMUNICATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Literature on how to address misinformation has rapidly expanded in recent years. The aim of this scoping review was to synthesize the growing published literature on health and science misinformation mitigation interventions. English-language articles published from January 2017 to July 2022 were included. After title/abstract screening, 115 publications (148 empirical studies) met inclusion criteria and were coded for sample characteristics, topics, mitigation strategies, research methods, outcomes, and intervention efficacy. A marked increase in misinformation mitigation research was observed in 2020-2022. COVID-19, vaccines, and climate change were the most frequently addressed topics. Most studies used general population samples recruited online; few focused on populations most vulnerable to misinformation. Most studies assessed cognitive outcomes (e.g., knowledge), with fewer assessing health behavior, communication behavior, or skills. Correction (k = 97) was the most used misinformation mitigation strategy, followed by education and other literacy initiatives (k = 39) and prebunking/inoculation (k = 24). Intervention efficacy varied, with 76 studies reporting positive, 17 reporting null, and 68 reporting mixed results. Most misinformation mitigation interventions were limited to short-term online experiments focused on improving cognitive outcomes. Priority research areas going forward include expanding and diversifying study samples, scaling interventions, conducting longitudinal observations, and focusing on communities susceptible to misinformation.

减少健康与科学误导:2017 年至 2022 年文献范围综述》。
近年来,有关如何解决误导问题的文献迅速增加。本次范围界定综述旨在综合已发表的有关健康和科学误导缓解干预措施的不断增长的文献。本文收录了 2017 年 1 月至 2022 年 7 月间发表的英文文章。经过标题/摘要筛选,115篇出版物(148项实证研究)符合纳入标准,并对样本特征、主题、缓解策略、研究方法、结果和干预效果进行了编码。在 2020-2022 年期间,误导缓解研究明显增加。COVID-19、疫苗和气候变化是最常涉及的主题。大多数研究使用在线招募的普通人群样本;很少有研究关注最易受误导信息影响的人群。大多数研究评估的是认知结果(如知识),评估健康行为、交流行为或技能的研究较少。纠正(k = 97)是使用最多的错误信息缓解策略,其次是教育和其他扫盲措施(k = 39)以及预先灌输/接种(k = 24)。干预效果各不相同,76 项研究报告了积极效果,17 项报告了无效效果,68 项报告了混合效果。大多数减少错误信息的干预措施仅限于短期在线实验,重点是改善认知结果。今后的重点研究领域包括扩大研究样本并使其多样化、扩大干预规模、进行纵向观察以及关注易受误导信息影响的社区。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
8.20
自引率
10.30%
发文量
184
期刊介绍: As an outlet for scholarly intercourse between medical and social sciences, this noteworthy journal seeks to improve practical communication between caregivers and patients and between institutions and the public. Outstanding editorial board members and contributors from both medical and social science arenas collaborate to meet the challenges inherent in this goal. Although most inclusions are data-based, the journal also publishes pedagogical, methodological, theoretical, and applied articles using both quantitative or qualitative methods.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信