Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorSanz Suarez-Lledo, Víctor José 
dc.contributor.authorÁlvarez Gálvez, Javier 
dc.contributor.otherBiomedicina, Biotecnología y Salud Públicaes_ES
dc.date.accessioned2021-02-18T09:12:31Z
dc.date.available2021-02-18T09:12:31Z
dc.date.issued2021-01
dc.identifier.issn1438-8871
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10498/24508
dc.description.abstractBackground: Although at present there is broad agreement among researchers, health professionals, and policy makers on the need to control and combat health misinformation, the magnitude of this problem is still unknown. Consequently, it is fundamental to discover both the most prevalent health topics and the social media platforms from which these topics are initially framed and subsequently disseminated. Objective: This systematic review aimed to identify the main health misinformation topics and their prevalence on different social media platforms, focusing on methodological quality and the diverse solutions that are being implemented to address this public health concern. Methods: We searched PubMed, MEDLINE, Scopus, and Web of Science for articles published in English before March 2019, with a focus on the study of health misinformation in social media. We defined health misinformation as a health-related claim that is based on anecdotal evidence, false, or misleading owing to the lack of existing scientific knowledge. We included (1) articles that focused on health misinformation in social media, including those in which the authors discussed the consequences or purposes of health misinformation and (2) studies that described empirical findings regarding the measurement of health misinformation on these platforms. Results: A total of 69 studies were identified as eligible, and they covered a wide range of health topics and social media platforms. The topics were articulated around the following six principal categories: vaccines (32%), drugs or smoking (22%), noncommunicable diseases (19%), pandemics (10%), eating disorders (9%), and medical treatments (7%). Studies were mainly based on the following five methodological approaches: social network analysis (28%), evaluating content (26%), evaluating quality (24%), content/text analysis (16%), and sentiment analysis (6%). Health misinformation was most prevalent in studies related to smoking products and drugs such as opioids and marijuana. Posts with misinformation reached 87% in some studies. Health misinformation about vaccines was also very common (43%), with the human papilloma virus vaccine being the most affected. Health misinformation related to diets or pro-eating disorder arguments were moderate in comparison to the aforementioned topics (36%). Studies focused on diseases (ie, noncommunicable diseases and pandemics) also reported moderate misinformation rates (40%), especially in the case of cancer. Finally, the lowest levels of health misinformation were related to medical treatments (30%). Conclusions: The prevalence of health misinformation was the highest on Twitter and on issues related to smoking products and drugs. However, misinformation on major public health issues, such as vaccines and diseases, was also high. Our study offers a comprehensive characterization of the dominant health misinformation topics and a comprehensive description of their prevalence on different social media platforms, which can guide future studies and help in the development of evidence-based digital policy action plans.es_ES
dc.formatapplication/pdfes_ES
dc.language.isoenges_ES
dc.publisherJMIR PUBLICATIONSes_ES
dc.rightsAtribución 4.0 Internacional*
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/*
dc.sourceJ Med Internet Res 2021;23(1):e17187es_ES
dc.subjectsocial mediaes_ES
dc.subjecthealth misinformationes_ES
dc.subjectinfodemiologyes_ES
dc.subjectinfodemicses_ES
dc.subjectsocial networkses_ES
dc.subjectpoor quality informationes_ES
dc.subjectsocial contagiones_ES
dc.titlePrevalence of Health Misinformation on Social Media: Systematic Reviewes_ES
dc.typejournal articlees_ES
dc.rights.accessRightsopen accesses_ES
dc.identifier.doi10.2196/17187
dc.relation.projectIDRamon Cajal Program [RYC-2016-19353]es_ES
dc.relation.projectIDUniversity Research Institute on Social Sciences (INDESS, University of Cadiz)es_ES
dc.relation.projectIDEuropean Social Fund (ESF)es_ES


Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

Atribución 4.0 Internacional
This work is under a Creative Commons License Atribución 4.0 Internacional