Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Systematic Reviews 1/2022

Open Access 01-12-2022 | COVID-19 | Protocol

Interventions to mitigate COVID-19 misinformation: protocol for a scoping review

Authors: Navin Kumar, Nathan Walter, Kate Nyhan, Kaveh Khoshnood, Joseph D. Tucker, Chris T. Bauch, Qinglan Ding, S. Mo Jones-Jang, Munmun De Choudhury, Jason L. Schwartz, Orestis Papakyriakopoulos, Laura Forastiere

Published in: Systematic Reviews | Issue 1/2022

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

The duration and impact of the COVID-19 pandemic depends in a large part on individual and societal actions which is influenced by the quality and salience of the information to which they are exposed. Unfortunately, COVID-19 misinformation has proliferated. To date, no systematic efforts have been made to evaluate interventions that mitigate COVID-19-related misinformation. We plan to conduct a scoping review that seeks to fill several of the gaps in the current knowledge of interventions that mitigate COVID-19-related misinformation.

Methods

A scoping review focusing on interventions that mitigate COVID-19 misinformation will be conducted. We will search (from January 2020 onwards) MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Web of Science Core Collection, Africa-Wide Information, Global Health, WHO Global Literature on Coronavirus Disease Database, WHO Global Index Medicus, and Sociological Abstracts. Gray literature will be identified using Disaster Lit, Google Scholar, Open Science Framework, governmental websites, and preprint servers (e.g., EuropePMC, PsyArXiv, MedRxiv, JMIR Preprints). Study selection will conform to Joanna Briggs Institute Reviewers’ Manual 2020 Methodology for JBI Scoping Reviews. Only English language, original studies will be considered for inclusion. Two reviewers will independently screen all citations, full-text articles, and abstract data. A narrative summary of findings will be conducted. Data analysis will involve quantitative (e.g., frequencies) and qualitative (e.g., content and thematic analysis) methods.

Discussion

Original research is urgently needed to design interventions to mitigate COVID-19 misinformation. The planned scoping review will help to address this gap.

Systematic review registrations

Systematic Review Registration: Open Science Framework (osf/io/etw9d).
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
go back to reference Pennycook G, McPhetres J, Zhang Y, Rand D. Fighting COVID-19 misinformation on social media: experimental evidence for a scalable accuracy nudge intervention. PsyArXiv Preprints. 2020;10. Pennycook G, McPhetres J, Zhang Y, Rand D. Fighting COVID-19 misinformation on social media: experimental evidence for a scalable accuracy nudge intervention. PsyArXiv Preprints. 2020;10.
2.
go back to reference Frenkel S, Alba D, Zhong R. Surge of virus misinformation stumps Facebook and Twitter. N Y Times. 2020;8. Frenkel S, Alba D, Zhong R. Surge of virus misinformation stumps Facebook and Twitter. N Y Times. 2020;8.
3.
go back to reference Vraga EK, Bode L. Correction as a solution for health misinformation on social media. Am J Public Health. 2020;110:S278–80.CrossRef Vraga EK, Bode L. Correction as a solution for health misinformation on social media. Am J Public Health. 2020;110:S278–80.CrossRef
4.
go back to reference Evanega S, Lynas M, Adams J, Smolenyak K, Insights CG. Coronavirus misinformation: quantifying sources and themes in the COVID-19 ‘infodemic’. JMIR Preprints. 2020. Evanega S, Lynas M, Adams J, Smolenyak K, Insights CG. Coronavirus misinformation: quantifying sources and themes in the COVID-19 ‘infodemic’. JMIR Preprints. 2020.
5.
go back to reference Wang Y, McKee M, Torbica A, Stuckler D. Systematic literature review on the spread of health-related misinformation on social media. Soc Sci Med. 2019;240:112552.CrossRef Wang Y, McKee M, Torbica A, Stuckler D. Systematic literature review on the spread of health-related misinformation on social media. Soc Sci Med. 2019;240:112552.CrossRef
6.
go back to reference Loomba S, de Figueiredo A, Piatek S, de Graaf K, Larson HJ. Measuring the impact of exposure to COVID-19 vaccine misinformation on vaccine intent in the UK and US. medRxiv. 2020. Loomba S, de Figueiredo A, Piatek S, de Graaf K, Larson HJ. Measuring the impact of exposure to COVID-19 vaccine misinformation on vaccine intent in the UK and US. medRxiv. 2020.
7.
go back to reference Agley J, Xiao Y, Thompson EE, Golzarri-Arroyo L. COVID-19 misinformation prophylaxis: protocol for a randomized trial of a brief informational intervention. JMIR Res Protoc. 2020;9(12):e24383.CrossRef Agley J, Xiao Y, Thompson EE, Golzarri-Arroyo L. COVID-19 misinformation prophylaxis: protocol for a randomized trial of a brief informational intervention. JMIR Res Protoc. 2020;9(12):e24383.CrossRef
8.
go back to reference MacFarlane D, Tay LQ, Hurlstone MJ, Ecker UK. Refuting spurious COVID-19 treatment claims reduces demand and misinformation sharing. J Appl Res Memory Cogn. 2020. MacFarlane D, Tay LQ, Hurlstone MJ, Ecker UK. Refuting spurious COVID-19 treatment claims reduces demand and misinformation sharing. J Appl Res Memory Cogn. 2020.
9.
go back to reference Geeng C, Francisco T, West J, Roesner F. Social media COVID-19 misinformation interventions viewed positively, but have limited impact. arXiv preprint arXiv:201211055. 2020. Geeng C, Francisco T, West J, Roesner F. Social media COVID-19 misinformation interventions viewed positively, but have limited impact. arXiv preprint arXiv:201211055. 2020.
10.
go back to reference Nyhan B, Reifler J. When corrections fail: the persistence of political misperceptions. Polit Behav. 2010;32(2):303–30.CrossRef Nyhan B, Reifler J. When corrections fail: the persistence of political misperceptions. Polit Behav. 2010;32(2):303–30.CrossRef
11.
go back to reference Walter N, Brooks JJ, Saucier CJ, Suresh S. Evaluating the impact of attempts to correct health misinformation on social media: a meta-analysis. Health Commun. 2020:1–9. Walter N, Brooks JJ, Saucier CJ, Suresh S. Evaluating the impact of attempts to correct health misinformation on social media: a meta-analysis. Health Commun. 2020:1–9.
12.
go back to reference Wood T, Porter E. The elusive backfire effect: mass attitudes’ steadfast factual adherence. Polit Behav. 2019;41(1):135–63.CrossRef Wood T, Porter E. The elusive backfire effect: mass attitudes’ steadfast factual adherence. Polit Behav. 2019;41(1):135–63.CrossRef
13.
go back to reference Walter N, Murphy ST. How to unring the bell: a meta-analytic approach to correction of misinformation. Commun Monogr. 2018;85(3):423–41.CrossRef Walter N, Murphy ST. How to unring the bell: a meta-analytic approach to correction of misinformation. Commun Monogr. 2018;85(3):423–41.CrossRef
14.
go back to reference MpS C, Jones CR, Hall Jamieson K, Albarrac´ın D. Debunking: a meta-analysis of the psychological efficacy of messages countering misinformation. Psychol Sci. 2017;28(11):1531–46.CrossRef MpS C, Jones CR, Hall Jamieson K, Albarrac´ın D. Debunking: a meta-analysis of the psychological efficacy of messages countering misinformation. Psychol Sci. 2017;28(11):1531–46.CrossRef
15.
go back to reference Suarez-Lledo V, Alvarez-Galvez J. Prevalence of health misinformation on social media: systematic review. J Med Internet Res. 2021;23(1):e17187.CrossRef Suarez-Lledo V, Alvarez-Galvez J. Prevalence of health misinformation on social media: systematic review. J Med Internet Res. 2021;23(1):e17187.CrossRef
16.
go back to reference Porter E, Wood TJ. False alarm: the truth about political mistruths in the Trump era: Cambridge University Press; 2019.CrossRef Porter E, Wood TJ. False alarm: the truth about political mistruths in the Trump era: Cambridge University Press; 2019.CrossRef
17.
go back to reference Arksey H, O’Malley L. Scoping studies: towards a methodological framework. Int J Soc Res Methodol. 2005;8(1):19–32.CrossRef Arksey H, O’Malley L. Scoping studies: towards a methodological framework. Int J Soc Res Methodol. 2005;8(1):19–32.CrossRef
18.
go back to reference Tricco AC, Lillie E, Zarin W, O’Brien KK, Colquhoun H, Levac D, et al. PRISMA extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR): checklist and explanation. Ann Intern Med. 2018;169(7):467–73.CrossRef Tricco AC, Lillie E, Zarin W, O’Brien KK, Colquhoun H, Levac D, et al. PRISMA extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR): checklist and explanation. Ann Intern Med. 2018;169(7):467–73.CrossRef
19.
go back to reference Peters MD, Marnie C, Tricco AC, Pollock D, Munn Z, Alexander L, et al. Updated methodological guidance for the conduct of scoping reviews. JBI Evid Synthesis. 2020;18(10):2119–26.CrossRef Peters MD, Marnie C, Tricco AC, Pollock D, Munn Z, Alexander L, et al. Updated methodological guidance for the conduct of scoping reviews. JBI Evid Synthesis. 2020;18(10):2119–26.CrossRef
21.
go back to reference Lefebvre C, Duffy S. Peer reviewing search strategies. HTAi Vortal. 2018. Lefebvre C, Duffy S. Peer reviewing search strategies. HTAi Vortal. 2018.
22.
go back to reference Clarivate Analytics. Endnote X8 for windows. Philadelphia, PA: Clarivate Analytics; 2017. Clarivate Analytics. Endnote X8 for windows. Philadelphia, PA: Clarivate Analytics; 2017.
23.
go back to reference Nussbaumer-Streit B, Klerings I, Dobrescu A, Persad E, Stevens A, Garritty C, et al. Excluding non-English publications from evidence-syntheses did not change conclusions: a meta-epidemiological study. J Clin Epidemiol. 2020;118:42–54.CrossRef Nussbaumer-Streit B, Klerings I, Dobrescu A, Persad E, Stevens A, Garritty C, et al. Excluding non-English publications from evidence-syntheses did not change conclusions: a meta-epidemiological study. J Clin Epidemiol. 2020;118:42–54.CrossRef
24.
go back to reference Morrison A, Polisena J, Husereau D, Moulton K, Clark M, Fiander M, et al. The effect of English-language restriction on systematic review-based meta-analyses: a systematic review of empirical studies. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2012;28(2):138.CrossRef Morrison A, Polisena J, Husereau D, Moulton K, Clark M, Fiander M, et al. The effect of English-language restriction on systematic review-based meta-analyses: a systematic review of empirical studies. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2012;28(2):138.CrossRef
25.
go back to reference Scherer RW, Saldanha IJ. How should systematic reviewers handle conference abstracts? A view from the trenches. Syst Rev. 2019;8(1):264.CrossRef Scherer RW, Saldanha IJ. How should systematic reviewers handle conference abstracts? A view from the trenches. Syst Rev. 2019;8(1):264.CrossRef
26.
go back to reference Turner RM, Bird SM, Higgins JP. The impact of study size on meta-analyses: examination of underpowered studies in Cochrane reviews. PloS one. 2013;8(3):e59202.CrossRef Turner RM, Bird SM, Higgins JP. The impact of study size on meta-analyses: examination of underpowered studies in Cochrane reviews. PloS one. 2013;8(3):e59202.CrossRef
27.
go back to reference VH Innovation. Covidence systematic review software. Melbourne, Australia; 2017. VH Innovation. Covidence systematic review software. Melbourne, Australia; 2017.
28.
go back to reference Nyhan B. Facts and myths about misperceptions. J Econ Perspect. 2020;34(3):220–36.CrossRef Nyhan B. Facts and myths about misperceptions. J Econ Perspect. 2020;34(3):220–36.CrossRef
29.
go back to reference Silagy CA, Middleton P, Hopewell S. Publishing protocols of systematic reviews: comparing what was done to what was planned. Jama. 2002;287(21):2831–4.CrossRef Silagy CA, Middleton P, Hopewell S. Publishing protocols of systematic reviews: comparing what was done to what was planned. Jama. 2002;287(21):2831–4.CrossRef
30.
go back to reference Murray CJ, Piot P. The potential future of the COVID-19 pandemic: will SARS-CoV-2 become a recurrent seasonal infection? JAMA. 2021. Murray CJ, Piot P. The potential future of the COVID-19 pandemic: will SARS-CoV-2 become a recurrent seasonal infection? JAMA. 2021.
31.
go back to reference Miake-Lye IM, Hempel S, Shanman R, Shekelle PG. What is an evidence map? A systematic review of published evidence maps and their definitions, methods, and products. Syst Rev. 2016;5(1):28.CrossRef Miake-Lye IM, Hempel S, Shanman R, Shekelle PG. What is an evidence map? A systematic review of published evidence maps and their definitions, methods, and products. Syst Rev. 2016;5(1):28.CrossRef
32.
go back to reference Boström AM, Slaughter SE, Chojecki D, Estabrooks CA. What do we know about knowledge translation in the care of older adults? A scoping review. J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2012;13(3):210–9.CrossRef Boström AM, Slaughter SE, Chojecki D, Estabrooks CA. What do we know about knowledge translation in the care of older adults? A scoping review. J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2012;13(3):210–9.CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Interventions to mitigate COVID-19 misinformation: protocol for a scoping review
Authors
Navin Kumar
Nathan Walter
Kate Nyhan
Kaveh Khoshnood
Joseph D. Tucker
Chris T. Bauch
Qinglan Ding
S. Mo Jones-Jang
Munmun De Choudhury
Jason L. Schwartz
Orestis Papakyriakopoulos
Laura Forastiere
Publication date
01-12-2022
Publisher
BioMed Central
Keyword
COVID-19
Published in
Systematic Reviews / Issue 1/2022
Electronic ISSN: 2046-4053
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-022-01917-4

Other articles of this Issue 1/2022

Systematic Reviews 1/2022 Go to the issue