The COVID-19 pandemic accelerated a broader crisis of epistemic authority in medicine, fostering the emergence of refused-knowledge communities as socially credible alternatives to official healthcare. This study examines the sociocognitive factors associated with extra-institutional care-seeking among members of a Facebook health community promoting therapeutic protocols misaligned with the clinical guidelines approved by the Italian Ministry of Health. A cross-sectional survey was administered between June and September 2022 to a purposive sample of members of the #TDC19 Facebook group (N = 574). Path-analytic mediation models were estimated to test the role of trust in official medicine, digital health literacy, and overconfidence as mediators of the relationship between refused-knowledge beliefs and extra-institutional care-seeking. Endorsement of refused-knowledge beliefs was positively associated with extra-institutional care-seeking. A significant indirect association via trust in official medicine emerged, while digital health literacy and overconfidence did not yield significant indirect effects. Perceived COVID-19 severity was indirectly associated with care-seeking via trust in official medicine. Lower trust in official medicine thus emerges as a relevant but not exhaustive correlate of extra-institutional care-seeking, which remained directly associated with refused-knowledge beliefs after adjustment for trust. The #TDC19 case illustrates how refused-knowledge communities driven by licensed physicians reconfigure rather than reject the expert/lay boundary, redirecting trust toward outsider professionals. Rebuilding trust in official medicine may require addressing the structural conditions of its erosion rather than focusing exclusively on individual health beliefs.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Bertolazzi et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: