Systematic review reveals health misinformation complexities, indicating a need for structured interventions and definitions.
Background Despite the wide variety of studies that have focused on the recent COVID-19 infodemic, defining health mis- or disinformation remains a challenge due to the dynamic nature of the social media ecosystem and, in particular, the different terminologies from different fields of knowledge. Objective In this work, we aim to develop a conceptual framework of health misinformation during pandemic contexts that will enable the establishment of an interoperable definition of this concept and consequently a better management of these problems in the future. Methods We conducted a systematic review of reviews to develop a conceptual framework for health misinformation during the pandemic context as a case study. Results This review comprises 51 reviews from which we developed a conceptual framework that integrates 6 key domains—sources, drivers, content, dissemination channels, target audiences, and health-related effects of mis- or disinformation—offering a structured approach to analyze and categorize health misinformation. These 6 domains collectively form the basis of our proposed conceptual framework. Conclusions Our results highlight the complexity and multifaceted nature of health disinformation and underscore the need for a common language across disciplines addressing this global problem in order to use interoperable definitions and advance this evolving field of study. By offering a structured conceptual framework, we also provide a valuable foundation for interventions aimed at surveillance, public communication, and digital content moderation in future health emergencies.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Gálvez et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: