“Attention: Myth Follows!” Facilitated Communication, Parent and Professional Attitudes towards Evidence-based Practice, and the Power of Misinformation

Stopping healthcare misinformation: The effect of financial incentives and legislation

Fake news and misinformation have become a major social issue. And yet, many researchers concern primarily about political misinformation, leaving healthcare misinformation less emphasized. Nevertheless, healthcare misinformation may create consequences such as delayed diagnosis or treatment of patients or even public health crisis. We conducted an online experiment to test the role of financial incentives and legislation on disseminating online healthcare misinformation. Our findings revealed that financial incentives have a positive but diminishing impact on the likelihood of sharing online healthcare information regardless of validity. However, financial incentives have a stronger impact on attracting readers to share healthcare misinformation that they perceived to be fake. Surprisingly, legislation may deter the sharing of healthcare information that users perceive to be true but cannot deter them from sharing the healthcare misinformation they perceive to be fake. We also provided some practical implications for formulating measures of battling against healthcare misinformation for policymakers.

Parent perceptions, beliefs, and fears around genetic treatments and cures for children with Angelman syndrome

Genetic therapies have shown recent promise in alleviating some of the cognitive issues associated with some genetic disorders; however, these therapies may come with significant health and socio-ethical concerns, particularly when they involve child participants. Little is known about what parents of children with genetic disorders think about genetic therapies, or about their knowledge of how genetic-based therapy might treat their child's symptoms. Forty-two parents of children with Angelman syndrome (AS) and 27 parents of a mixed etiology comparison group completed an online survey reporting on their perceptions of, and priorities for, genetic therapy. Almost all parents of children with AS (95%) and the comparison group (89%) agreed that treatments aiming to reduce symptoms associated with their child's syndrome were positive. However, significantly more parents of children with AS (95%) than the comparison group (56%) felt that genetic treatment trials aiming to "cure" their child should be a research priority. AS parent priorities for the focus of clinical trials were neurology/seizures, communication skills, and motor skills/mobility. For the comparison group, the priorities were IQ, immune response, and expressive speech. Parents of both groups did not want treatments to change their child's personality or their happiness. Global assumptions cannot be made about targets for therapy between syndromes, about parental understanding of genetics, or about research evidence across syndromes. This study highlights the need for true family and patient engagement in all stages of the research design and treatment evaluation.

The effects of source expertise and trustworthiness on recollection: the case of vaccine misinformation

Designing effective communication strategies for correcting vaccines misinformation requires an understanding of how the target group might react to information from different sources. The present study examined whether erroneous inferences about vaccination could be effectively corrected by a perceived credible (i.e. expert or trustworthy) source. Two experiments are reported using a standard continued influence paradigm, each featuring two correction conditions on vaccine misinformation. Participants were presented with a story containing a piece of information that was later retracted by a perceived credible or not so credible source. Experiment 1 showed that providing a correction reduced participants' use of the original erroneous information, yet the overall reliance on misinformation did not significantly differ between the low- and high-expertise correction groups. Experiment 2 revealed that a correction from a high-trustworthy source decreased participants' reliance on misinformation when making inferences; nonetheless, it did not positively affect the reported intent to vaccinate one's child. Overall, source trustworthiness was more relevant than source expertise.

Empirically Supported Treatments for Students with Autism: General Education Teacher Knowledge, Use, and Social Validity Ratings

Objective: To examine teachers' knowledge and use of empirically supported treatments (ESTs) for children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD), and the extent to which they deem them socially valid in general education settings. Method: Totally, 155 general education teachers completed an online survey examining knowledge, use, and perceived social validity of ESTs targeting school readiness skills. Sources of information accessed and the relationship of knowledge, use, and social validity with demographic variables were investigated. Results: Teachers reported knowledge of, and were using, all ESTs. ESTs were used more frequently than non-ESTs. Knowledge, use, and social validity of ESTs were strongly associated. Teachers reported accessing a range of sources of information, with varying degrees of trust placed in these sources. Conclusion: Teachers' knowledge of available ESTs for children with ASD is linked to their use. Increasing awareness of social validity of ESTs, and how they can be successfully translated into classroom settings will influence uptake.

Allied Health Professionals' Knowledge and Use of ASD Intervention Practices

Allied health professionals (AHPs) are trusted sources of information and intervention for clients with autism spectrum disorder. However, the level of implementation of empirically-supported therapies and the accuracy of the knowledge they use to inform intervention selection is largely unknown. The present study explored the accuracy of AHPs' knowledge and use of practices, and explored links to individual attitudes and organisational culture. Overall results from the 156 AHPs surveyed suggested general accuracy of knowledge, and use of empirically supported treatments, with accuracy linked to use. Use of practices unsupported by research was linked to organisational culture and openness to new interventions. The presence of misinformation and the impact on selection and use of effective practices are discussed.

Evaluation of a template for countering misinformation-Real-world Autism treatment myth debunking

Misinformation poses significant challenges to evidence-based practice. In the public health domain specifically, treatment misinformation can lead to opportunity costs or direct harm. Alas, attempts to debunk misinformation have proven sub-optimal, and have even been shown to “backfire”, including increasing misperceptions. Thus, optimized debunking strategies have been developed to more effectively combat misinformation. The aim of this study was to test these strategies in a real-world setting, targeting misinformation about autism interventions. In the context of professional development training, we randomly assigned participants to an “optimized-debunking” or a “treatment-as-usual” training condition and compared support for non-empirically-supported treatments before, after, and six weeks following completion of online training. Results demonstrated greater benefits of optimized debunking immediately after training; thus, the implemented strategies can serve as a general and flexible debunking template. However, the effect was not sustained at follow-up, highlighting the need for further research into strategies for sustained change.

Misinformation lingers in memory: Failure of three pro-vaccination strategies

People's inability to update their memories in light of corrective information may have important public health consequences, as in the case of vaccination choice. In the present study, we compare three potentially effective strategies in vaccine promotion: one contrasting myths vs. facts, one employing fact and icon boxes, and one showing images of non-vaccinated sick children. Beliefs in the autism/vaccines link and in vaccines side effects, along with intention to vaccinate a future child, were evaluated both immediately after the correction intervention and after a 7-day delay to reveal possible backfire effects. Results show that existing strategies to correct vaccine misinformation are ineffective and often backfire, resulting in the unintended opposite effect, reinforcing ill-founded beliefs about vaccination and reducing intentions to vaccinate. The implications for research on vaccines misinformation and recommendations for progress are discussed.