Misinformation of COVID-19 on the Internet: Infodemiology Study
Misinformation of COVID-19 on the Internet: Infodemiology Study
复制标题
DOI：
10.2196/18444
复制
发表时间：
2020-04-01
影响因子：
8.5
通讯作者：
Soto-Vega, Elena
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Yunam Cuan-Baltazar, Jose;Jose Munoz-Perez, Maria;Soto-Vega, Elena
背景：互联网已成为全球用户健康信息的重要来源。新型冠状病毒引起了对广泛传播虚假或误导性健康信息的信息的大流行搜索。目的：本研究的目的是使用经过验证的工具，评估网上关于冠状病毒病(新冠肺炎)的信息的质量和可读性，并将信息质量与可读性联系起来。方法：以谷歌网站(2020年2月6日)为关键词进行搜索。在检索时，“新冠肺炎”或“SARS-CoV-2”(严重急性呼吸综合征冠状病毒2)一词不存在。使用网络健康基金会行为准则(HONcode)、美国医学会杂志(JAMA)基准、识别工具和谷歌排名对前110个点击量进行了批判性分析。结果：前110个网站经过批判性分析，只有1.8%(n=2)的网站有HONcode印章。JAMA基准显示，39.1%(n=43)的网站没有该工具要求的任何类别，只有10.0%(11/110)的网站具有JAMA要求的四个质量标准。辨别得分显示，70.0%(n=77)的网站被评为低分，没有网站被评为高分。结论：非卫生人员和科学界需要分别关注他们阅读和产生的信息的质量。武汉冠状病毒健康危机虚假信息是由媒体制造的，错误信息是用户从互联网上获取的。互联网的使用对公众健康有风险，在这种情况下，政府应该制定策略，在不谴责民众的情况下监管互联网上的健康信息。截至2020年2月6日，互联网上没有关于新冠肺炎的优质信息。
Background: The internet has become an important source of health information for users worldwide. The novel coronavirus caused a pandemic search for information with broad dissemination of false or misleading health information.Objective: The aim of this study was to evaluate the quality and readability of online information about the coronavirus disease (COVID-19), which was a trending topic on the internet, using validated instruments and relating the quality of information to its readability.Methods: The search was based on the term "Wuhan Coronavirus" on the Google website (February 6, 2020). At the search time, the terms "COVID-19" or "SARS-CoV-2" (severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2) did not exist. Critical analysis was performed on the first 110 hits using the Health on the Net Foundation Code of Conduct (HONcode), the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) benchmark, the DISCERN instrument, and Google ranking.Results: The first 110 websites were critically analyzed, and only 1.8% (n=2) of the websites had the HONcode seal. The JAMA benchmark showed that 39.1% (n=43) of the websites did not have any of the categories required by this tool, and only 10.0% (11/110) of the websites had the four quality criteria required by JAMA. The DISCERN score showed that 70.0% (n=77) of the websites were evaluated as having a low score and none were rated as having a high score.Conclusions: Nonhealth personnel and the scientific community need to be aware about the quality of the information they read and produce, respectively. The Wuhan coronavirus health crisis misinformation was produced by the media, and the misinformation was obtained by users from the internet. The use of the internet has a risk to public health, and, in cases like this, the governments should be developing strategies to regulate health information on the internet without censuring the population. By February 6, 2020, no quality information was available on the internet about COVID-19.