E-Cigarette-Related Nicotine Misinformation on Social Media

Sidani, Jaime E.; Hoffman, Beth L.; Colditz, Jason B.; Melcher, Eleanna M.; Taneja, Sanya Bathla; Shensa, Ariel; Primack, Brian A.; Davis, Esa M.; Chu, Kar-Hai

doi:10.1080/10826084.2022.2026963

Cited by 16 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 44 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Its user population comprises representatives from both scientific and nonscientific communities. Its impact on patients has been evaluated in a variety of settings, including cancer care, vaping, and asthma ( 9 , 10 , 12 , 14 , 15 ). We aimed to evaluate the quality and sources of information discussed on Twitter regarding IPF.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Content Analysis of Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis-related Information on Twitter

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Information regarding idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) on the internet is often outdated, inaccurate, and potentially harmful. Twitter is a social media platform that allows users to post content in the form of “tweets”. Objective We sought to assess the prevalence of inaccurate information regarding IPF on Twitter. We hypothesized that foundations and medical organizations would be the least likely to post inaccurate information and that inaccurate tweets would have higher user engagement. Methods All tweets posted between 2011 and 2019 were gathered using “snscrape” on Python 3.8 while searching for the phrase “idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis”. Quantitative analysis was performed to describe trends in IPF-related tweet frequency over time. A subset of tweets made between 2018 and 2019 was screened for verifiable medical statements, which were then analyzed for accuracy compared with contemporary clinical practice guidelines, with descriptive statistics reported. Logistic regression was used to compare tweet accuracy and recommendation of nonindicated therapies across sources, with adjustment for tweet age and character count. Wilcoxon rank-sum tests were used to determine if user engagement (favorites, retweets, and replies) differed between accurate and inaccurate tweets. Results A total of 16,787 tweets were identified between 2011 and 2019. Between 2018 and 2019, 4,861 tweets were included, of which 1,612 (33%) contained verifiable medical statements. Tweets from sources other than foundations or medical organizations were more likely to contain inaccurate information and to recommend nonindicated therapies in both unadjusted and adjusted analyses. News and media sources had the highest odds of communicating potentially harmful information in both adjusted (odds ratio [OR], 12.00; 95% confidence interval [CI], 5.87–27.16) and unadjusted (OR, 11.62; 95% CI, 5.70–26.21) analyses when compared with foundations and medical organizations. Tweets containing inaccurate information had significantly lower numbers of favorites and retweets ( P < 0.001 for both). Conclusion Misinformation regarding IPF is present on Twitter and is more often presented by news and media sources. Medically inaccurate tweets displayed less user engagement than accurate tweets. This differs from findings on IPF-related information on YouTube and Facebook, which may reflect differences in both author and consumer qualities across social media platforms.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Content Analysis of Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis-related Information on Twitter

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Infodemics affect health behaviors outside of vaccines and infectious diseases, including nutrition, cancer, and diabetes ( 42 ). Misinformation about e-cigarettes and vaping products circulating misinformation on social media channels popular with teens, for example, has strongly affected teenagers ( 43 ). Tracking and understanding these infodemics through routine infodemic surveillance systems is a critical first step toward designing interventions to promote population health.…”

Section: Vision and Considerations For Infodemic Surveillance Systemsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Future of Infodemic Surveillance as Public Health Surveillance

Chiou¹,

Voegeli²,

Wilhelm³

et al. 2022

Emerg. Infect. Dis.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Public health systems need to be able to detect and respond to infodemics (outbreaks of misinformation, disinformation, information overload, or information voids). Drawing from our experience at the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the COVID-19 State of Vaccine Confidence Insight Reporting System has been created as one of the first public health infodemic surveillance systems. Key functions of infodemic surveillance systems include monitoring the information environment by person, place, and time; identifying infodemic events with digital analytics; conducting offline community-based assessments; and generating timely routine reports. Although specific considerations of several system attributes of infodemic surveillance system must be considered, infodemic surveillance systems share several similarities with traditional public health surveillance systems. Because both information and pathogens are spread more readily in an increasingly hyperconnected world, sustainable and routine systems must be created to ensure that timely interventions can be deployed for both epidemic and infodemic response.

show abstract

“…Misinformation may downplay the risks of vape use and may be in part responsible for the recent youth vaping epidemic [ 3 – 6 ]. Conversely, online misinformation that vapes are just as or more harmful than smoking [ 5 , 6 ] may deter current cigarette smokers who are unable to quit smoking from considering reducing harms by switching to vapes as a tool to be used for a period of time to assist in achieving abstinence from cigarettes [ 7 ]. For example, regarding the outbreak of vaping-related lung injury (EVALI), most cases were related to the consumption of vitamin E acetate, an additive included in some tetrahydrocannabinol devices [ 8 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Interventions to mitigate vaping misinformation: protocol for a scoping review

Kumar

Hampsher²,

Walter³

et al. 2022

Syst Rev

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background The impact of misinformation about vapes’ relative harms compared with smoking may lead to increased tobacco-related burden of disease. To date, no systematic efforts have been made to chart interventions that mitigate vaping-related misinformation. We plan to conduct a scoping review that seeks to fill gaps in the current knowledge of interventions that mitigate vaping-related misinformation. Methods A scoping review focusing on interventions that mitigate vaping-related misinformation will be conducted. We will search (no date restrictions) MEDLINE, Scopus, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Web of Science Core Collection, Global Health, ERIC, and Sociological Abstracts. Gray literature will be identified using Disaster Lit, Google Scholar, Open Science Framework, governmental websites, and preprint servers (e.g., EuropePMC, PsyArXiv, MedRxiv, JMIR Preprints). Study selection will conform to Joanna Briggs Institute Reviewers’ Manual 2020 Methodology for JBI Scoping Reviews. Only English language, original studies will be considered for inclusion. Two reviewers will independently screen all citations, full-text articles, and abstract data. A narrative summary of findings will be conducted. Data analysis will involve quantitative (e.g., frequencies) and qualitative (e.g., content and thematic analysis) methods. Where possible, a single effect size of exposure to the mitigation of vaping-related misinformation will be calculated per sample. Similarly, where possible, each study will be coded for moderating characteristics to find and account for systematic differences in the size of the effect or outcome that is being analyzed. Quality will be appraised with the study quality assessment tools utilized by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute. Findings will be subjected to several different publication bias tests: Egger’s regression test, Begg and Mazumdar’s ran correlation test, and generation of a funnel plot with effect sizes plotted against a corresponding standard error. Discussion Original research is urgently needed to design interventions to mitigate vaping-related misinformation. The planned scoping review will help to address this gap. Systematic review registration Open Science Framework osf/io/hy3tk.

show abstract

E-Cigarette-Related Nicotine Misinformation on Social Media

Cited by 16 publications

References 44 publications

Content Analysis of Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis-related Information on Twitter

Content Analysis of Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis-related Information on Twitter

The Future of Infodemic Surveillance as Public Health Surveillance

Interventions to mitigate vaping misinformation: protocol for a scoping review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About