CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 171Misinformation and Its ImpactsSocial Media in Health EducationHealth Literacy and Information Accessibility

Healthcare professionals’ acts of correcting health misinformation on social media

Bautista, John Robert, Zhang, Yan, Gwizdka, Jacek·2021·International Journal of Medical Informatics
DOI 10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2021.104375
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Background Health misinformation on social media is a public health concern, and healthcare professionals can help correct it. However, research on how they correct health misinformation on social media is rare.Objective To develop a conceptual model that demonstrates how healthcare professionals correct health misinformation on social media.Methods In-depth semi-structured interviews were conducted between January and March 2020 with 30 U.S. healthcare professionals (15 registered nurses and 15 medical doctors). Participants were recruited through purposive and snowball sampling and interviewed via mobile phone calls (using their mobile phone number) or apps (via Zoom or Skype). Interview data were analyzed using a grounded theory approach.Results This study presents a two-phased conceptual model that shows healthcare professionals' acts of correcting health misinformation on social media (e.g., Twitter and Facebook). The first phase involves acts of authentication by which healthcare professionals verify health-related social media posts to be true or not. They undergo the process of internal acts of authentication (i.e., checking the author, checking for cues, checking the topic) and, if needed, external acts of authentication (i.e., examining the author and examining the content). When social media posts are deemed to contain health misinformation, they proceed to the second phase - acts of correction. In this phase, they undergo correction preparation (i.e., reflect, reveal, relate, and respect) and correction dissemination (i.e., private priming, public priming, public rebuttal, and private rebuttal).Conclusions The study proposed a conceptual model that shows how healthcare professionals correct health misinformation on social media. The findings can guide healthcare professionals when identifying and correcting health misinformation on and off social media, and can guide health authorities when developing campaigns against health misinformation.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2021.104375

Cites

35 of 35 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Bautista, J. R., Zhang, Y., & Gwizdka, J.
Affiliations
The University of Texas at Austin (US)
Corresponding author
Bautista, John Robert
ORCID
Venue
International Journal of Medical Informatics
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2021-04
Volume
148
Pages
104375
ISSN
1386-5056 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2021.104375
OpenAlex
W3120079110
Cited by
171
References
35
Citations by year
2026: 27 · 2025: 46 · 2024: 35 · 2023: 24 · 2022: 26 · 2021: 13
FWCI
34.28
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
Locations
  • International Journal of Medical Informatics (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
University of Texas at Austin
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Misinformation and Its Impacts
  • Social Sciences › Health › Social Media in Health Education
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Literacy and Information Accessibility
Keywords
health misinformation, social media, healthcare workers, authentication, rebuttal, conceptual model, nurses, physicians, Twitter, Facebook
MeSH terms
Communication, Delivery of Health Care, Health Personnel, Humans, Public Health, Social Media

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review