COVID-19-related misinformation on social media: a systematic review
Open accessAbstract
OBJECTIVE: To review misinformation related to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) on social media during the first phase of the pandemic and to discuss ways of countering misinformation. METHODS: We searched PubMed®, Scopus, Embase®, PsycInfo and Google Scholar databases on 5 May 2020 and 1 June 2020 for publications related to COVID-19 and social media which dealt with misinformation and which were primary empirical studies. We followed the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses and the guidelines for using a measurement tool to assess systematic reviews. Evidence quality and the risk of bias of included studies were classified using the grading of recommendations assessment, development and evaluation approach. The review is registered in the international prospective register of systematic reviews (PROSPERO; CRD42020182154). FINDINGS: We identified 22 studies for inclusion in the qualitative synthesis. The proportion of COVID-19 misinformation on social media ranged from 0.2% (413/212 846) to 28.8% (194/673) of posts. Of the 22 studies, 11 did not categorize the type of COVID-19-related misinformation, nine described specific misinformation myths and two reported sarcasm or humour related to COVID-19. Only four studies addressed the possible consequences of COVID-19-related misinformation: all reported that it led to fear or panic. CONCLUSION: Social media play an increasingly important role in spreading both accurate information and misinformation. The findings of this review may help health-care organizations prepare their responses to subsequent phases in the COVID-19 infodemic and to future infodemics in general.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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?
New forms of disinformation through digital media are especially powerful in disseminating ideas because of their reach, immediacy, relative anonymity, and the ease of creating echo chambers.
“Now we are experiencing new forms of disinformation through digital media,231 which are especially powerful in disseminating ideas because of their reach (eg, Facebook has nearly 2·4 billion subscribers), immediacy, relative anonymity, and the ease of creating echo chambers of tightly clustered groups receiving utterly different impressions of the facts from other online communities.”
From The Lancet Commission on lessons for the future from the COVID-19 pandemic (2022) · cites this paper as [233]
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
Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: the PRISMA statement
Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., Altman, D. G., & for the PRISMA Group (2009) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.b2535 · Cited by 83,823 · see citing works
Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement
Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., & Altman, D. G. (2009) · Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2009.06.005 · Cited by 19,575 · see citing works
Shea, B. J., Reeves, B. C., Wells, G., Thuku, M., Hamel, C., Moran, J., Moher, D., Tugwell, P., Welch, V., Kristjansson, E., et al. (2017) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.j4008 · Cited by 10,636 · see citing works
The COVID-19 social media infodemic
Cinelli, M., Quattrociocchi, W., Galeazzi, A., Valensise, C. M., Brugnoli, E., Schmidt, A. L., Zola, P., Zollo, F., & Scala, A. (2020) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-020-73510-5 · Cited by 2,313 · see citing works
Systematic Literature Review on the Spread of Health-related Misinformation on Social Media
Wang, Y., McKee, M., Torbica, A., & Stuckler, D. (2019) · Social Science & Medicine · doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2019.112552 · Cited by 1,806 · see citing works
Pennycook, G., McPhetres, J., Zhang, Y., Lu, J. G., & Rand, D. G. (2020) · Psychological Science · doi:10.1177/0956797620939054 · Cited by 1,715 · see citing works
Pandemics in the Age of Twitter: Content Analysis of Tweets during the 2009 H1N1 Outbreak
Chew, C., & Eysenbach, G. (2010) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0014118 · Cited by 1,614 · see citing works
The spread of low-credibility content by social bots
Shao, C., Ciampaglia, G. L., Varol, O., Yang, K.-C., Flammini, A., & Menczer, F. (2018) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/s41467-018-06930-7 · Cited by 1,125 · see citing works
Coronavirus Goes Viral: Quantifying the COVID-19 Misinformation Epidemic on Twitter
Kouzy, R., Jaoude, J. A., Kraitem, A. M., Alam, M. B. E., Karam, B. S., Adib, E., Zarka, J. G., Traboulsi, C., Akl, E. A., & Baddour, K. (2020) · Cureus · doi:10.7759/cureus.7255 · Cited by 900 · see citing works
Debunking: A Meta-Analysis of the Psychological Efficacy of Messages Countering Misinformation
Chan, M.-P. S., Jones, C. R., Hall Jamieson, K., & Albarracín, D. (2017) · Psychological Science · doi:10.1177/0956797617714579 · Cited by 898 · see citing works
COVID-19 and the 5G Conspiracy Theory: Social Network Analysis of Twitter Data
Ahmed, W., Vidal‐Alaball, J., Downing, J., & Seguí, F. L. (2020) · Journal of Medical Internet Research · doi:10.2196/19458 · Cited by 798 · see citing works
The spread of low-credibility content by social bots
Shao, C., Ciampaglia, G. L., Varol, O., Yang, K.-C., Flammini, A., & Menczer, F. (2018) · RePEc: Research Papers in Economics · Cited by 574 · see citing works
Tangcharoensathien, V., Calleja, N., Nguyen, T., Purnat, T., D’Agostino, M., Garcia-Saiso, S., Landry, M., Rashidian, A., Hamilton, C., AbdAllah, A., et al. (2020) · Journal of Medical Internet Research · doi:10.2196/19659 · Cited by 561 · see citing works
How to Fight an Infodemic: The Four Pillars of Infodemic Management
Eysenbach, G. (2020) · Journal of Medical Internet Research · doi:10.2196/21820 · Cited by 551 · see citing works
Pulido, C., Villarejo-Carballido, B., Redondo-Sama, G., & Gómez, A. (2020) · International Sociology · doi:10.1177/0268580920914755 · Cited by 449 · see citing works
Network dynamics of social influence in the wisdom of crowds
Becker, J., Brackbill, D., & Centola, D. (2017) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1615978114 · Cited by 397 · see citing works
Ebola, Twitter, and misinformation: a dangerous combination?
Oyeyemi, S. O., Gabarrón, E., & Wynn, R. (2014) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.g6178 · Cited by 351 · see citing works
Self-citationDesinformación en tiempos de pandemia: tipología de los bulos sobre la Covid-19
Salaverría, R., Buslón, N., Pan, F. L., León, B., López‐Goñi, I., & Ilundain, M. C. E. (2020) · El Profesional de la Informacion · doi:10.3145/epi.2020.may.15 · Cited by 334 · see citing works
World leaders' usage of twitter in response to the COVID-19 pandemic: A content analysis
Rufai, S. R., & Bunce, C. (2020) · Journal of Public Health · doi:10.1093/pubmed/fdaa049 · Cited by 308 · see citing works
Coronavirus, Ageism, and Twitter: An Evaluation of Tweets about Older Adults and COVID ‐19
Jimenez‐Sotomayor, M. R., Gómez‐Moreno, C., & Soto‐Pérez‐de‐Celis, E. (2020) · Journal of the American Geriatrics Society · doi:10.1111/jgs.16508 · Cited by 215 · see citing works
Bora, K., Das, D., Barman, B., & Borah, P. (2018) · Pathogens and Global Health · doi:10.1080/20477724.2018.1507784 · Cited by 215 · see citing works
Masip, P., Aran-Ramspott, S., Ruiz-Caballero, C., Suau, J., Almenar, E., & Puertas-Graell, D. (2020) · El Profesional de la Informacion · doi:10.3145/epi.2020.may.12 · Cited by 172 · see citing works
Dasilva, J. P., Ayerdi, K. M., & Galdospín, T. M. (2020) · El Profesional de la Informacion · doi:10.3145/epi.2020.may.08 · Cited by 122 · see citing works
Chesser, A., Ham, A. D., & Woods, N. K. (2020) · Health Education & Behavior · doi:10.1177/1090198120931420 · Cited by 109 · see citing works
The Views of Medical Faculty Students in Turkey Concerning the COVID-19 Pandemic
Aker, S., & Mıdık, Ö. (2020) · Journal of Community Health · doi:10.1007/s10900-020-00841-9 · Cited by 102 · see citing works
Pulido, C., Villarejo-Carballido, B., Redondo-Sama, G., Guo, M., Ramis‐Salas, M., & Flecha, R. (2020) · International and Multidisciplinary Journal of Social Sciences · doi:10.17583/rimcis.2020.5386 · Cited by 93 · see citing works
Negative Messages Spread Rapidly and Widely on Social Media
Tsugawa, S., & Ohsaki, H. (2015) · Conference on Online Social Networks · doi:10.1145/2817946.2817962 · Cited by 92 · see citing works
Healthcare information on YouTube: Pregnancy and COVID‐19
Yüksel, B., & Çakmak, K. (2020) · International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics · doi:10.1002/ijgo.13246 · Cited by 87 · see citing works
Mining Physicians’ Opinions on Social Media to Obtain Insights Into COVID-19: Mixed Methods Analysis
Wahbeh, A., Nasralah, T., Al-Ramahi, M. A., & El-Gayar, O. (2020) · JMIR Public Health and Surveillance · doi:10.2196/19276 · Cited by 84 · see citing works
Kudchadkar, S. R., & Carroll, C. L. (2020) · Pediatric Critical Care Medicine · doi:10.1097/pcc.0000000000002474 · Cited by 81 · see citing works
GRADE-Leitlinien: 3. Bewertung der Qualität der Evidenz (Vertrauen in die Effektschätzer)
Meerpohl, J. J., Langer, G., Perleth, M., Gartlehner, G., Kaminski-Hartenthaler, A., & Schünemann, H. J. (2012) · Zeitschrift für Evidenz Fortbildung und Qualität im Gesundheitswesen · doi:10.1016/j.zefq.2012.06.013 · Cited by 77 · see citing works
Gebbia, V., Piazza, D., Valerio, M. R., Borsellino, N., & Firenze, A. (2020) · JCO Global Oncology · doi:10.1200/go.20.00118 · Cited by 68 · see citing works
Cheng, Y., & Luo, Y. (2020) · Online Information Review · doi:10.1108/oir-08-2020-0386 · Cited by 54 · see citing works
Adaptation to SARS‐CoV‐2 under stress: Role of distorted information
Sharov, K. S. (2020) · European Journal of Clinical Investigation · doi:10.1111/eci.13294 · Cited by 34 · see citing works
Kawchuk, G. N., Hartvigsen, J., Innes, S. I., et al. (2020) · Chiropractic & Manual Therapies · doi:10.1186/s12998-020-00314-9 · Cited by 28 · see citing works
PUBLIC REACTION TO COVID-19 ON TWITTER: A THEMATIC ANALYSIS
Mustafa, A., Ansari, I., Mohanta, S. K., et al. (2020) · EPRA International Journal of Multidisciplinary Research (IJMR) · doi:10.36713/epra4518 · Cited by 10 · see citing works
Use of Social Media among Intern Doctors in Regards to Covid-19
Subedi, P., Thapa, B., & Pandey, A. (2020) · Europasian Journal of Medical Sciences · doi:10.46405/ejms.v2i1.41 · Cited by 7 · see citing works
Mejia, C. R., & Choque-Vargas, J. (2020) · Cited by 7 · see citing works
Genomics, social media and the novel coronavirus pandemic, COVID-19
Morinha, F., & Magalhães, P. M. R. (2020) · Journal of Global Health Reports · doi:10.29392/001c.12836 · Cited by 4 · see citing works
Gabarrón, E., Oyeyemi, S. O., & Wynn, R. (2021) · Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) · doi:10.5281/zenodo.4548331 · Cited by 1 · see citing works
Self-citation
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
The Lancet Commission on lessons for the future from the COVID-19 pandemic
Sachs, J. D., Karim, S. S. A., Aknin, L., Allen, J., Brosbøl, K., Colombo, F., Barron, G. C., Espinosa, M. F., Gaspar, V., Gaviria, A., et al. (2022) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(22)01585-9 · Cited by 842 · see citing works
Sallam, M., Salim, N. A., Al-Tammemi, A. B., Barakat, M., Fayyad, D., Hallit, S., Harapan, H., Hallit, R., & Mahafzah, A. (2023) · Cureus · doi:10.7759/cureus.35029 · Cited by 130 · see citing works
Exploring the Use of Personalized AI for Identifying Misinformation on Social Media
Jahanbakhsh, F., Katsis, Y., Wang, D., Popa, L., & Muller, M. (2023) · Proceedings of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3544548.3581219 · Cited by 42 · see citing works
Digitising “The Big Lie”: Algorithmic Curation as an Inhibitor of Media Exposure Diversity Online
Reid, J. (2024) · Communicatio · doi:10.1080/02500167.2024.2424841 · Cited by 10 · see citing works
Impact of a Long Lockdown on Mental Health and the Role of Media Use: Web-Based Survey Study
Grygarová, D., Adámek, P., Juríčková, V., Horáček, J., Bakštein, E., Fajnerová, I., & Kesner, L. (2022) · JMIR Mental Health · doi:10.2196/36050 · Cited by 8 · see citing works
Pearce, E. E., Majid, A., Brown, T., Shepherd, R. F., Rising, C., Wilsnack, C., Thompson, A. S., Gilkey, M. B., Ribisl, K. M., Lazard, A. J., et al. (2024) · JMIR Formative Research · doi:10.2196/64343 · Cited by 2 · see citing works
- Authors
- Gabarron, E., Oyeyemi, S. O., & Wynn, R.
- Affiliations
- Norwegian Centre for E-health Research, University Hospital of North Norway, Sykehusveien 23, 9019Tromsø, Norway.
- UiT The Arctic University of Norway (NO)
- Venue
- Bulletin of the World Health Organization
- Publisher
- WHO Press
- Published
- 2021-03-19
- Volume
- 99
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 455-463A
- ISSN
- 0042-9686 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC8164188
- OpenAlex
- W3171059312
- Cited by
- 345
- References
- 42
- Citations by year
- 2026: 38 · 2025: 45 · 2024: 70 · 2023: 93 · 2022: 76 · 2021: 23
- FWCI
- 12.56
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- diamond
- doi.org
- Licence
- cc-by
- Locations
- Bulletin of the World Health Organization (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- NORA - Norwegian Open Research Archives (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- Repository of Digital Objects for Teaching Research and Culture (University of Valencia) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Misinformation and Its Impacts
- Social Sciences › Communication › Communication and COVID-19 Impact
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Academic Publishing and Open Access
- Keywords
- COVID-19 pandemic, misinformation, social media, infodemic, health misinformation, fear and panic, countering misinformation, health communication
- MeSH terms
- COVID-19, SARS-CoV-2, Humans, 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
