Browsing by Subject "Misinformation"
Now showing 1 - 6 of 6
Results Per Page
Sort Options
Item Describing Hidradenitis Suppurativa Misinformation Diffusion Among Facebook Users: A Content Analysis(Matrix Medical Communications, 2023) Méndez, Alejandra; Rao, Megana; Rahnama-Moghadam, Sahand; Gomaa, Basma; Walsh-Buhi, Eric R.; Dermatology, School of MedicineItem Instagram Versus Reality: Who Are Actually Plastic Surgeons?(Wolters Kluwer, 2025-01-10) Singh, Nikhi P.; Holohan, Mary M.; Harmon, Cameron; Fallah, Kasra N.; Gross, Jeffrey; Patel, Aadarsh; Boyd, Carter J.; Greives, Matthew R.; de la Torre, Jorge; Gordillo, Gayle; King, Timothy W.; Surgery, School of MedicineBackground: Instagram has become one of the most powerful marketing tools available to plastic surgeons because patients have increasingly turned to online resources to find physicians. Within, we review the online presence of self-ascribed plastic surgeons in the United States to identify potential misinformation and dishonest advertising. Methods: The Inflact database was queried for the search terms: "plastic surgeon/surgery," "plastic and reconstructive surgeon/surgery," "aesthetic surgeon/surgery," and "cosmetic surgeon/surgery." US physician account information, history of medical training, American Board of Plastic Surgery (ABPS) certification status, and posts were reviewed. Results: In total, 1399 physicians practicing within the United States were identified. Most attended medical school in the United States (93%), a minority received integrated plastic surgery training in the United States (14%), and the majority attended general surgery residency in the United States (57%) followed by independent plastic surgery residency in the United States (50%). Altogether, 1141 individuals were explicitly listed as "plastic surgeons" on Instagram, nearly a quarter of these (325 individuals, 28%) were not certified by the ABPS, and nearly a fifth (251 individuals, 22%) received no training in plastic surgery. Conclusions: Nearly one-third of "plastic surgeons" on Instagram are not certified through the ABPS. This is detrimental to the reputation of plastic surgery and has the potential to create broader consequences and may lead to patients mistakenly receiving care from unqualified physicians. It is paramount that plastic surgeons create a united front against such endeavors through advocacy efforts within the American Society of Plastic Surgeons.Item Misinformation about COVID-19: evidence for differential latent profiles and a strong association with trust in science(Springer Nature, 2021-01-07) Agley, Jon; Xiao, Yunyu; School of Social WorkBackground: The global spread of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has been mirrored by diffusion of misinformation and conspiracy theories about its origins (such as 5G cellular networks) and the motivations of preventive measures like vaccination, social distancing, and face masks (for example, as a political ploy). These beliefs have resulted in substantive, negative real-world outcomes but remain largely unstudied. Methods: This was a cross-sectional, online survey (n=660). Participants were asked about the believability of five selected COVID-19 narratives, their political orientation, their religious commitment, and their trust in science (a 21-item scale), along with sociodemographic items. Data were assessed descriptively, then latent profile analysis was used to identify subgroups with similar believability profiles. Bivariate (ANOVA) analyses were run, then multivariable, multivariate logistic regression was used to identify factors associated with membership in specific COVID-19 narrative believability profiles. Results: For the full sample, believability of the narratives varied, from a low of 1.94 (SD=1.72) for the 5G narrative to a high of 5.56 (SD=1.64) for the zoonotic (scientific consensus) narrative. Four distinct belief profiles emerged, with the preponderance (70%) of the sample falling into Profile 1, which believed the scientifically accepted narrative (zoonotic origin) but not the misinformed or conspiratorial narratives. Other profiles did not disbelieve the zoonotic explanation, but rather believed additional misinformation to varying degrees. Controlling for sociodemographics, political orientation and religious commitment were marginally, and typically non-significantly, associated with COVID-19 belief profile membership. However, trust in science was a strong, significant predictor of profile membership, with lower trust being substantively associated with belonging to Profiles 2 through 4. Conclusions: Belief in misinformation or conspiratorial narratives may not be mutually exclusive from belief in the narrative reflecting scientific consensus; that is, profiles were distinguished not by belief in the zoonotic narrative, but rather by concomitant belief or disbelief in additional narratives. Additional, renewed dissemination of scientifically accepted narratives may not attenuate belief in misinformation. However, prophylaxis of COVID-19 misinformation might be achieved by taking concrete steps to improve trust in science and scientists, such as building understanding of the scientific process and supporting open science initiatives.Item Types of HPV Vaccine Misinformation Circulating on Twitter (X) That Parents Find Most Concerning: Insights From a Cross-Sectional Survey and Content Analysis(JMIR, 2025-05-12) Morgan, Jennifer C.; Badlis, Sarah; Head, Katharine J.; Zimet, Gregory; Cappella, Joseph N.; Kornides, Melanie L.; Communication Studies, School of Liberal ArtsBackground: Parents frequently use social media as a source of information about the human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine. Our previous work identified that, on Twitter (now X), almost 25% of tweets about the HPV vaccine contain misinformation, and these tweets receive higher audience engagement than accurate tweets. Exposure to misinformation can increase vaccine hesitancy, but the types of misinformation found on social media vary widely, and not all misinformation exposure influences vaccine attitudes and vaccine uptake. Despite the prevalence of misinformation and antivaccine information on social media, little work has assessed parents' assessments of these posts. Objective: This study examines which types of misinformation on Twitter parents find the most concerning. Methods: In April 2022, we surveyed 263 US parents of children ages 7-10 years using a Qualtrics survey panel. They viewed a first round of 9 randomly selected tweets from a pool of 126 tweets circulating on Twitter that contained misinformation about the HPV vaccine. Then parents selected up to 3 that they found most concerning. The process was repeated once more with 9 selected from the pool of 117 messages not shown in the first round. Using this information, a concern score for each tweet was calculated based on the number of parents who viewed the tweet and selected it as concerning. In total, 2 researchers independently coded the misinformation tweets to identify rhetorical strategies used and health concerns mentioned. Multiple linear regression tested whether tweet content significantly predicted the concern score of the tweet. Results: Parental concern about the different misinformation tweets varied widely, with some misinformation being selected as most concerning just 2.8% of the time it was viewed and other misinformation being selected 79.5% of the time it was viewed. Multiple beta regression analyses found that misinformation tweets using negative emotional appeals (b=.79, P<.001), expressing pharmaceutical company skepticism (b=.36, P=.036), invoking governmental authority (b=.44, P=.02), and mentioning hospitalization (b=1.00, P=.003), paralysis (b=.54, P=.02), and infertility (b=.52, P=.04) significantly increased the percent of parents rating the misinformation tweets as most concerning. Conclusions: Misinformation about HPV vaccination is ubiquitous on social media, and it would be impossible to target and correct all of it. Counter-messaging campaigns and interventions to combat misinformation need to focus on the types of misinformation that concern parents and ultimately may impact vaccine uptake. Results from this study identify the misinformation content that parents find most concerning and provide a useful list of targets for researchers developing interventions to combat misinformation with the goal of increasing HPV vaccine uptake.