Cited by 595Misinformation and Its ImpactsViral Infections and Outbreaks ResearchVaccine Coverage and Hesitancy

Institutional trust and misinformation in the response to the 2018–19 Ebola outbreak in North Kivu, DR Congo: a population-based survey

Open access
Vinck, Patrick, Pham, Phuong N, Bindu, Kenedy K, Bedford, Juliet, Nilles, Eric J·2019·The Lancet Infectious Diseases

Abstract

Background The current outbreak of Ebola in eastern DR Congo, beginning in 2018, emerged in a complex and violent political and security environment. Community-level prevention and outbreak control measures appear to be dependent on public trust in relevant authorities and information, but little scholarship has explored these issues. We aimed to investigate the role of trust and misinformation on individual preventive behaviours during an outbreak of Ebola virus disease (EVD).Methods We surveyed 961 adults between Sept 1 and Sept 16, 2018. We used a multistage sampling design in Beni and Butembo in North Kivu, DR Congo. Of 412 avenues and cells (the lowest administrative structures; 99 in Beni and 313 in Butembo), we randomly selected 30 in each city. In each avenue or cell, 16 households were selected using the WHO Expanded Programme on Immunization's random walk approach. In each household, one adult (aged ≥18 years) was randomly selected for interview. Standardised questionnaires were administered by experienced interviewers. We used multivariate models to examine the intermediate variables of interest, including institutional trust and belief in selected misinformation, with outcomes of interest related to EVD prevention behaviours.Findings Among 961 respondents, 349 (31·9%, 95% CI 27·4-36·9) trusted that local authorities represent their interest. Belief in misinformation was widespread, with 230 (25·5%, 21·7-29·6) respondents believing that the Ebola outbreak was not real. Low institutional trust and belief in misinformation were associated with a decreased likelihood of adopting preventive behaviours, including acceptance of Ebola vaccines (odds ratio 0·22, 95% CI 0·21-0·22, and 1·40, 1·39-1·42) and seeking formal health care (0·06, 0·05-0·06, and 1·16, 1·15-1·17).Interpretation The findings underscore the practical implications of mistrust and misinformation for outbreak control. These factors are associated with low compliance with messages of social and behavioural change and refusal to seek formal medical care or accept vaccines, which in turn increases the risk of spread of EVD.Funding The Harvard Humanitarian Initiative Innovation Fund.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s1473-3099(19)30063-5

Cites

25 of 25 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Trust was also related to decisions to adopt preventive measures such as Ebola vaccinations in the Democratic Republic of Congo.

    “Trust was also related to decisions to adopt preventive measures such as Ebola vaccinations in the Democratic Republic of Congo 197 .”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Meredith LS, Eisenman DP, Rhodes H, Ryan G, Long A. Trust influences response to public health messages during a bioterrorist event. J Health Commun 2007; 12: 217-32.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Vinck, P., Pham, P. N., Bindu, K. K., Bedford, J., & Nilles, E. J.
Affiliations
  • Harvard University (US)
  • Anthrologica (GB)
Corresponding author
Vinck, Patrick
Venue
The Lancet Infectious Diseases
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2019-05
Volume
19
Issue
5
Pages
529-536
ISSN
1473-3099 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2924370385
Cited by
595
References
25
Citations by year
2026: 69 · 2025: 49 · 2024: 51 · 2023: 87 · 2022: 101 · 2021: 115 · 2020: 98 · 2019: 25
FWCI
170.25
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • The Lancet Infectious Diseases (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Misinformation and Its Impacts
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Infectious Diseases › Viral Infections and Outbreaks Research
  • Social Sciences › Health › Vaccine Coverage and Hesitancy
Keywords
Ebola virus disease, institutional trust, misinformation, outbreak response, preventive behavior, health-seeking behavior, health communication, North Kivu, Beni, Butembo, conflict-affected settings, vaccine hesitancy
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Communication, Congo, Disease Outbreaks, Family Characteristics, Female, Humans, Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice, Male, Middle Aged, Patient Acceptance of Health Care, Surveys and Questionnaires, Hemorrhagic Fever, Ebola, Trust, Young Adult

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