The COVID-19 Infodemic: A Quantitative Analysis Through Facebook

Public health agencies' use of social media for communication during pandemics: a scoping review of the literature

Public health agencies (PHAs) have increasingly incorporated social media into their communication mix during successive pandemics in the 21st century. However, the quality, timing, and accuracy of their health messages have varied significantly, resulting in mixed outcomes for communication, audience engagement, and pandemic management. This study aimed to identify factors influencing the effectiveness of pandemic-related health messages shared by PHAs on social media and to report their impact on public engagement as documented in the literature. A scoping literature review was conducted following a predefined protocol. An electronic search of 7 relevant databases and 5 grey literature repositories yielded 9,714 papers published between January 2003 and November 2022. Seventy-three papers were deemed eligible and selected for review. The results underscored the insufficiency of social media guidance policies for PHAs. Six themes were identified: message source, message topic, message style, message timing, content credibility and reliability, and message recipient profile. These themes encompassed 20 variables that could inform PHAs' social media public health communication during pandemics. Additionally, the findings revealed potential interconnectedness among the variables, and this study concluded by proposing a conceptual model that expands upon existing theoretical foundations for developing and evaluating pandemic-related health messaging.

COVID-19 vaccination status in Germany: Factors and reasons for not being vaccinated (yet)

Introduction

The COVID-19 pandemic has demonstrated that effective vaccines constitute a central element of successful pandemic control. Although everyone in Germany has had the opportunity to receive a COVID-19 vaccine, some people remain hesitant or refuse to get vaccinated. To address this phenomenon as well as to examine the unvaccinated population more closely, the present study investigates (RQ1) factors explaining the COVID-19 vaccination status (RQ2) trust in different types of COVID-19 vaccines, and (RQ3) people's specific reasons for not getting vaccinated against COVID-19.

Methods

We base our findings on a representative survey that we conducted in Germany in December 2021 with 1,310 respondents.

Results

In response to the first research question, a logistic regression shows that trust in specific institutions (e.g., medical experts and authorities) is positively related to vaccination status, whereas trust in companies and COVID-19-related social and alternative media consumption decreases the likelihood of being vaccinated. Furthermore (RQ2), while vaccinated people trust mRNA-based vaccines (e.g., BioNTech), most unvaccinated people put greater trust in recently developed protein-based vaccines (e.g., Novavax), albeit on a low level. Finally, our study reveals (RQ3) that the most important reason why people choose not to get vaccinated is that they wish to make their own decisions about their bodies.

Conclusion

Based on our results, we suggest that a successful vaccination campaign should address COVID-19 risk groups and lower income populations, increase trust in different public institutions and newly developed vaccines in advance, establish a multisectoral approach, and debunk fake news and misinformation. Furthermore, since unvaccinated respondents state that the desire to make their own choices about their body is the main reason why they have not gotten vaccinated against COVID-19, an effective vaccination campaign should emphasize the need for general practitioners who have a closer relationship with their patients who, in turn, trust their doctors.

Misinformation about medication during the COVID- 19 pandemic: A perspective of medical staff

BACKGROUND

Healthcare professionals had to face numerous challenges during the pandemic, their professional activity being influenced not only by the virus, but also by the spread of medical misinformation. In this regard, we aimed to analyze, from the perspective of medical staff, the way medical and non-medical information about the virus was communicated during the pandemic to encourage the development of future research or interventions in order to raise awareness about the way misinformation affected medical staff.

METHODS AND FINDINGS

The study was conducted on Romanian healthcare professionals. They were asked to answer to a questionnaire and the sample of the research includes 536 respondents. The findings revealed that most respondents stated that information about alternative treatments against the virus affected the credibility of health professionals, and that younger professionals believed to a greater extent that trust in doctors was affected. The research also showed that respondents were well informed about the drugs used in clinical trials in order to treat the virus.

CONCLUSIONS

Healthcare professionals declared that the spread of misinformation regarding alternative treatments, affected their credibility and the relationship with their patients. Healthcare professionals had knowledge about the drugs used in clinical trials, and they acknowledged the role of social media in spreading medical misinformation. However, younger professionals also believed that social media could be used to share official information about the virus.

Association of family wellbeing with forwarding and verifying COVID-19-related information, and mediation of family communication quality

Objective

We assessed the associations of family wellbeing with verifying and subsequently forwarding COVID-19-related information to family members and the mediating effect of the quality of family communication on these associations among Chinese adults in Hong Kong.

Methods

Under the Jockey Club SMART Family-Link Project, we conducted an online population-based survey, using Family wellbeing Scale and questions related to the family communication quality and forwarding and verifying COVID-19 information. Data were collected from 4,891 adults in May 2020. Prevalence estimates of forwarding and verifying COVID-19 information were weighted by sex, age, and education of the general population, and their associations with family wellbeing (ranged 0-10) were analyzed using generalized linear models with mutual adjustment. Their interactive effects on family wellbeing and the mediating effects of family communication quality were examined.

Results

In total, 53.9% of respondents usually/always forwarded COVID-19 information related to their family, 68.7% usually/always verified it before forwarding, and 40.9% did both. Greater family wellbeing was associated with usually/always forwarding [adjusted β (95% CI): 0.82 (0.72-0.92)] and usually/always verifying [0.43 (0.32-0.55)] (both P < 0.001) the information. Forwarding and verifying such information showed an additive effect on family wellbeing [1.25 (1.11-1.40)]. Family communication quality mediated the associations of family wellbeing with forwarding (83.7%) and verifying (86.6%) COVID-19-related information.

Conclusion

Forwarding COVID-19 information to family, verifying such information, and especially doing both, were associated with greater family wellbeing, being strongly mediated by the quality of family communication. Individuals should be encouraged to verify COVID-19-related information before forwarding it to family members amidst the COVID-19 pandemic.

Challenges for Corporate Reputation—Online Reputation Management in Times of Global Pandemic

The issue of corporate reputation management in the time of accelerated digitization has been a subject of research by academics and practitioners for more than a decade. The aim of this study was to provide an insight into the issue of reputation management in the Internet environment in the time of global pandemic. As for the structure of the research, the study mapped two horizons of events, the first one being the onset of the pandemic in the first half of 2020, and the second one the period of cancellation of antipandemic measures after 24 months. The research was localized in the market of Central Europe, specifically in the online market of the Slovak Republic. This market synthesized two important factors, namely the highly developmental nature and at the same time the increased degree of restraint it experienced during the two years of the pandemic. A sophisticated online reputation analysis (sentiment analysis, analysis of reputation determinants, and data synthesis through the TOR indicator) was performed on a significant sample of e-commerce representatives, the results of which provided relevant findings on reputational challenges and reputational threats. Based on the findings, it can be stated that the market has adapted relatively quickly to the changed conditions. The pandemic represented a market opportunity rather than an existential threat for the subjects examined. It also played the role of an imaginary accelerator in the evolutionary transition from offline to online.

The COVID-19 Infodemic Through Facebook: Comparison of Content and the Accuracy of Breastfeeding Information

Background

The coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic has resulted in a significant increase in the number of people seeking online support and information, particularly on social media. Nevertheless, the nature and trend of internet information, as well as its accuracy, are questionable. This study aimed to assess and compare the content, type/form, and degree of accuracy of breastfeeding information on Facebook before and during the COVID-19 pandemic (n = 288/phase).

Methodology

The data were gathered from Malaysian public and group/page Facebook posts (n = 456). Keyword searches were conducted using Malay and English breastfeeding terms. The dataset was screened and entered into a structured codebook. The Delphi approach was used to assess the accuracy of posts’ content performed by breastfeeding experts.

Results

Sharing personal experience (53.2%) was the most common topic in breastfeeding-related posts, followed by seeking questions (39.3%) and knowledge (8.0%). Sharing personal stories and knowledge posts were higher during COVID-19 than before (p = 0.001), although the seeking questions category was higher before the pandemic (p = 0.001). Most information posted was in text form (94.5%). About half of the posts (46.5%) were misleading, while (43.7%) were accurate. There was a significant difference in the accuracy of online posts before and during the COVID-19 pandemic (p = 0.001).

Conclusions

Compared to the pre-pandemic phase, forms/types of information on Facebook remained consistent, whereas the breastfeeding information content and its degree of accuracy differed during the pandemic.We need to explore other aspects of breastfeeding online content as well as its engagement, especially during a pandemic. Knowing the infant feeding-related topics that have been discussed and questioned on social media, as well as the accuracy of the data, allows policymakers and scientific communities to plan strategies for spreading credible breastfeeding information online. This includes creating interactive online media types of visual guidelines, web resources, and breastfeeding apps.

Investigating the effectiveness of COVID-19 pandemic countermeasures on the use of public transport: A case study of The Netherlands

During the COVID-19 pandemic, public transport in many cities faces dramatic reduction of passenger demand. Various countermeasures such as social distancing and in-vehicle disinfection have been implemented to reduce the potential risks concerning infection, the effectiveness in promoting the use of public transport however remains unclear. Unlike the usual situation where time and cost are the main factors affecting travel decisions, the uncertainty hiding behind the behavior change of public transport users in a pandemic might be greatly affected by the control measures and the perception of people. This paper therefore aims to examine the effects of COVID-19 related countermeasures implemented in public transport on individuals' travel decisions. We explore the extent to which do policy countermeasures influence different groups of people on the use of public transport. An error component latent class choice model was estimated using the data collected in the Netherlands. Results show that the restrictions policy lifted by the Dutch central government have significant effect on individuals' transportation mode choice decision during the pandemic. The related measures adopted by the public transport sector, by contrast, present different effects on different people. The older and highly educated people are more susceptible to enforcement measures, whereas young and single Dutch citizens are more accessible to non-compulsory measures. Moreover, compared with other private modes, public transport is generally identified as a riskier option, and the average willingness to travel descends. Findings of this study are helpful for the authorities in designing and promoting effective policies in the context of pandemics.

Role of latent factors and public policies in travel decisions under COVID-19 pandemic: Findings of a hybrid choice model

Policy measures to control the spread of COVID-19 imposed by different countries have a devastating impact on people's travel behaviors. Differing from the normal situation where general concerns on travel time and cost determine the travel choices, the uncertainty underlying behavior change in the case of a pandemic might be largely attributed to the latent aspects, i.e., social responsibility, risk perception, attitudes, which could diminish the effects of main attributes on travel decisions. Therefore, this paper examines the effects of COVID-19 related policies on individuals' travel choices influenced by the latent aspects. A stated choice experiment was designed to collect people's responses under policy measures to various transportation modes. Results of a hybrid choice model show that COVID-19 related policies significantly affect individuals' transportation mode choice decisions during pandemic situations. The attributes, like travel time and travel cost, which significantly impact travel behavior in normal situations, become less relevant. Moreover, the travel preferences during the pandemic are significantly associated with latent factors of social responsibility, fear of infection, perceived risk, and travel anxiety. In general, public transportation is identified as an insecure alternative compared with other private modes, and people who are more socially responsible tend to travel less during the pandemic. Outcomes of this study could be of value to policymakers and public health emergencies, e.g., government authorities to utilize such knowledge in providing social support for these COVID-19 countermeasures and designing customized policies for specific population groups.

Review on COVID-19 diagnosis models based on machine learning and deep learning approaches

COVID-19 is the disease evoked by a new breed of coronavirus called the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Recently, COVID-19 has become a pandemic by infecting more than 152 million people in over 216 countries and territories. The exponential increase in the number of infections has rendered traditional diagnosis techniques inefficient. Therefore, many researchers have developed several intelligent techniques, such as deep learning (DL) and machine learning (ML), which can assist the healthcare sector in providing quick and precise COVID-19 diagnosis. Therefore, this paper provides a comprehensive review of the most recent DL and ML techniques for COVID-19 diagnosis. The studies are published from December 2019 until April 2021. In general, this paper includes more than 200 studies that have been carefully selected from several publishers, such as IEEE, Springer and Elsevier. We classify the research tracks into two categories: DL and ML and present COVID-19 public datasets established and extracted from different countries. The measures used to evaluate diagnosis methods are comparatively analysed and proper discussion is provided. In conclusion, for COVID-19 diagnosing and outbreak prediction, SVM is the most widely used machine learning mechanism, and CNN is the most widely used deep learning mechanism. Accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity are the most widely used measurements in previous studies. Finally, this review paper will guide the research community on the upcoming development of machine learning for COVID-19 and inspire their works for future development. This review paper will guide the research community on the upcoming development of ML and DL for COVID-19 and inspire their works for future development.

Citation impact and social media visibility of Great Barrington and John Snow signatories for COVID-19 strategy

OBJECTIVE

The Great Barrington Declaration (GBD) and the John Snow Memorandum (JSM), each signed by numerous scientists, have proposed hotly debated strategies for handling the COVID-19 pandemic. The current analysis aimed to examine whether the prevailing narrative that GBD is a minority view among experts is true.

METHODS

The citation impact and social media presence of the key GBD and JSM signatories was assessed. Citation data were obtained from Scopus using a previously validated composite citation indicator that incorporated also coauthorship and author order and ranking was against all authors in the same Science-Metrix scientific field with at least five full papers. Random samples of scientists from the longer lists of signatories were also assessed. The number of Twitter followers for all key signatories was also tracked.

RESULTS

Among the 47 key GBD signatories, 20, 19 and 21, respectively, were top-cited authors for career impact, recent single-year (2019) impact or either. For comparison, among the 34 key JSM signatories, 11, 14 and 15, respectively, were top cited. Key signatories represented 30 different scientific fields (9 represented in both documents, 17 only in GBD and 4 only in JSM). In a random sample of n=30 scientists among the longer lists of signatories, five in GBD and three in JSM were top cited. By April 2021, only 19/47 key GBD signatories had personal Twitter accounts versus 34/34 of key JSM signatories; 3 key GBD signatories versus 10 key JSM signatories had >50 000 Twitter followers and extraordinary Kardashian K-indices (363-2569). By November 2021, four key GBD signatories versus 13 key JSM signatories had >50 000 Twitter followers.

CONCLUSIONS

Both GBD and JSM include many stellar scientists, but JSM has far more powerful social media presence and this may have shaped the impression that it is the dominant narrative.

Identifying Frames of the COVID-19 Infodemic: Thematic Analysis of Misinformation Stories Across Media

Background

The word "infodemic" refers to the deluge of false information about an event, and it is a global challenge for today's society. The sheer volume of misinformation circulating during the COVID-19 pandemic has been harmful to people around the world. Therefore, it is important to study different aspects of misinformation related to the pandemic.

Objective

This paper aimed to identify the main subthemes related to COVID-19 misinformation on various platforms, from traditional outlets to social media. This paper aimed to place these subthemes into categories, track the changes, and explore patterns in prevalence, over time, across different platforms and contexts.

Methods

From a theoretical perspective, this research was rooted in framing theory; it also employed thematic analysis to identify the main themes and subthemes related to COVID-19 misinformation. The data were collected from 8 fact-checking websites that formed a sample of 127 pieces of false COVID-19 news published from January 1, 2020 to March 30, 2020.

Results

The findings revealed 4 main themes (attribution, impact, protection and solutions, and politics) and 19 unique subthemes within those themes related to COVID-19 misinformation. Governmental and political organizations (institutional level) and administrators and politicians (individual level) were the 2 most frequent subthemes, followed by origination and source, home remedies, fake statistics, treatments, drugs, and pseudoscience, among others. Results indicate that the prevalence of misinformation subthemes had altered over time between January 2020 and March 2020. For instance, false stories about the origin and source of the virus were frequent initially (January). Misinformation regarding home remedies became a prominent subtheme in the middle (February), while false information related to government organizations and politicians became popular later (March). Although conspiracy theory web pages and social media outlets were the primary sources of misinformation, surprisingly, results revealed trusted platforms such as official government outlets and news organizations were also avenues for creating COVID-19 misinformation.

Conclusions

The identified themes in this study reflect some of the information attitudes and behaviors, such as denial, uncertainty, consequences, and solution-seeking, that provided rich information grounds to create different types of misinformation during the COVID-19 pandemic. Some themes also indicate that the application of effective communication strategies and the creation of timely content were used to persuade human minds with false stories in different phases of the crisis. The findings of this study can be beneficial for communication officers, information professionals, and policy makers to combat misinformation in future global health crises or related events.

The causes, impacts and countermeasures of COVID-19 "Infodemic": A systematic review using narrative synthesis

An unprecedented infodemic has been witnessed to create massive damage to human society. However, it was not thoroughly investigated. This systematic review aims to (1) synthesize the existing literature on the causes and impacts of COVID-19 infodemic; (2) summarize the proposed strategies to fight with COVID-19 infodemic; and (3) identify the directions for future research. A systematic literature search following the PRISMA guideline covering 12 scholarly databases was conducted to retrieve various types of peer-reviewed articles that reported causes, impacts, or countermeasures of the infodemic. Empirical studies were assessed for risk of bias using the Mixed-Methods Appraisal Tool. A coding theme was iteratively developed to categorize the causes, impacts, and countermeasures found from the included studies. Social media usage, low level of health/eHealth literacy, and fast publication process and preprint service are identified as the major causes of the infodemic. Besides, the vicious circle of human rumor-spreading behavior and the psychological issues from the public (e.g., anxiety, distress, fear) emerges as the characteristic of the infodemic. Comprehensive lists of countermeasures are summarized from different perspectives, among which risk communication and consumer health information need/seeking are of particular importance. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed and future research directions are suggested.

Overall and COVID-19-specific citation impact of highly visible COVID-19 media experts: bibliometric analysis

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate whether the COVID-19 experts who appear most frequently in media have high citation impact for their research overall, and for their COVID-19 peer-reviewed publications in particular and to examine the representation of women among such experts.

DESIGN

Cross-linking of data sets of most highly visible COVID-19 media experts with citation data on the impact of their published work (career-long publication record and COVID-19-specific work).

SETTING

Cable news appearance in prime-time programming or overall media appearances.

PARTICIPANTS

Most highly visible COVID-19 media experts in the USA, Switzerland, Greece and Denmark.

INTERVENTIONS

None.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Citation data from Scopus along with discipline-specific ranks of overall career-long and COVID-19-specific impact based on a previously validated composite citation indicator.

RESULTS

We assessed 76 COVID-19 experts who were highly visible in US prime-time cable news, and 50, 12 and 2 highly visible experts in media in Denmark, Greece and Switzerland, respectively. Of those, 23/76, 10/50, 2/12 and 0/2 were among the top 2% of overall citation impact among scientists in the same discipline worldwide. Moreover, 37/76, 15/50, 7/12 and 2/2 had published anything on COVID-19 that was indexed in Scopus as of 30 August 2021. Only 18/76, 6/50, 2/12 and 0/2 of the highly visible COVID-19 media experts were women. 55 scientists in the USA, 5 in Denmark, 64 in Greece and 56 in Switzerland had a higher citation impact for their COVID-19 work than any of the evaluated highly visible media COVID-19 experts in the respective country; 10/55, 2/5, 22/64 and 14/56 of them were women.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite notable exceptions, there is a worrisome disconnect between COVID-19 claimed media expertise and scholarship. Highly cited women COVID-19 experts are rarely included among highly visible media experts.

The rapid, massive growth of COVID-19 authors in the scientific literature

We examined the extent to which the scientific workforce in different fields was engaged in publishing COVID-19-related papers. According to Scopus (data cut, 1 August 2021), 210 183 COVID-19-related publications included 720 801 unique authors, of which 360 005 authors had published at least five full papers in their career and 23 520 authors were at the top 2% of their scientific subfield based on a career-long composite citation indicator. The growth of COVID-19 authors was far more rapid and massive compared with cohorts of authors historically publishing on H1N1, Zika, Ebola, HIV/AIDS and tuberculosis. All 174 scientific subfields had some specialists who had published on COVID-19. In 109 of the 174 subfields of science, at least one in 10 active, influential (top 2% composite citation indicator) authors in the subfield had authored something on COVID-19. Fifty-three hyper-prolific authors had already at least 60 (and up to 227) COVID-19 publications each. Among the 300 authors with the highest composite citation indicator for their COVID-19 publications, most common countries were USA (n = 67), China (n = 52), UK (n = 32) and Italy (n = 18). The rapid and massive involvement of the scientific workforce in COVID-19-related work is unprecedented and creates opportunities and challenges. There is evidence for hyper-prolific productivity.

Faster than warp speed: early attention to COVD-19 by anti-vaccine groups on Facebook

Background

The unprecedented rapid development of COVID-19 vaccines has faced SARS-CoV- (COVID-19) vaccine hesitancy, which is partially fueled by the misinformation and conspiracy theories propagated by anti-vaccine groups on social media. Research is needed to better understand the early COVID-19 anti-vaccine activities on social media.

Methods

This study chronicles the social media posts concerning COVID-19 and COVID-19 vaccines by leading anti-vaccine groups (Dr Tenpenny on Vaccines, the National Vaccine Information Center [NVIC] the Vaccination Information Network [VINE]) and Vaccine Machine in the early months of the COVID-19 pandemic (February–May 2020).

Results

Analysis of 2060 Facebook posts showed that anti-vaccine groups were discussing COVID-19 in the first week of February 2020 and were specifically discussing COVID-19 vaccines by mid-February 2020. COVID-19 posts by NVIC were more widely disseminated and showed greater influence than non-COVID-19 posts. Early COVID-19 posts concerned mistrust of vaccine safety and conspiracy theories.

Conclusion

Major anti-vaccine groups were sowing seeds of doubt on Facebook weeks before the US government launched its vaccine development program ‘Operation Warp Speed’. Early anti-vaccine misinformation campaigns outpaced public health messaging and hampered the rollout of COVID-19 vaccines.