Cargando…

COVID-19 vaccine misinformation in English-language news media: retrospective cohort study

OBJECTIVES: To describe COVID-19 vaccine misinformation and track trends over time in traditional news media. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study of a large database of online articles, July 2020–June 2021. SETTING: English-language articles from 100 news outlets with the greatest reach. MAIN OUTCOME...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Lurie, Peter, Adams, Jordan, Lynas, Mark, Stockert, Karen, Carlyle, Robyn Correll, Pisani, Amy, Evanega, Sarah Davidson
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Publishing Group 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9160593/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35649595
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2021-058956
_version_ 1784719297768062976
author Lurie, Peter
Adams, Jordan
Lynas, Mark
Stockert, Karen
Carlyle, Robyn Correll
Pisani, Amy
Evanega, Sarah Davidson
author_facet Lurie, Peter
Adams, Jordan
Lynas, Mark
Stockert, Karen
Carlyle, Robyn Correll
Pisani, Amy
Evanega, Sarah Davidson
author_sort Lurie, Peter
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVES: To describe COVID-19 vaccine misinformation and track trends over time in traditional news media. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study of a large database of online articles, July 2020–June 2021. SETTING: English-language articles from 100 news outlets with the greatest reach. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Numbers and percentages of articles containing COVID-19 vaccine misinformation over the study period. Further analysis by misinformation themes and whether articles included primary misinformation, fact-checking or simply referred to misinformation. RESULTS: 41 718 (3.2% of all COVID-19 vaccine articles) contained at least one of the vaccine misinformation themes based on the Boolean string developed for this study. The volume of such articles increased beginning in November 2020, but their percentage of all articles remained essentially stable after October 2020. 56.2% contained at least one mention of a safety theme, followed by development, production, and distribution (26.6%), and conspiracies (15.1%). Of 500 articles through January 2021 randomly selected from those identified by the Boolean string, 223 were not relevant, and 277 included either fact-checking (175 articles), refers to misinformation (87 articles) or primary misinformation (15 articles). In eight study weeks, the reach of these 277 articles (defined as visitors to the sites containing the articles) exceeded 250 million people. Fact-checking accounted for 69.6% of all reach for these articles and the number of such articles increased after November 2020. Overall, approximately 0.1% (95% CI 0.05% to 0.16%) of all articles on COVID-19 vaccines in our sample contained primary misinformation. CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 vaccine misinformation in traditional news media is uncommon but has the capacity to reach large numbers of readers and affect the vaccine conversation. Recent increases in fact-checking may counteract some of the misinformation currently circulating.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9160593
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher BMJ Publishing Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-91605932022-06-02 COVID-19 vaccine misinformation in English-language news media: retrospective cohort study Lurie, Peter Adams, Jordan Lynas, Mark Stockert, Karen Carlyle, Robyn Correll Pisani, Amy Evanega, Sarah Davidson BMJ Open Health Informatics OBJECTIVES: To describe COVID-19 vaccine misinformation and track trends over time in traditional news media. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study of a large database of online articles, July 2020–June 2021. SETTING: English-language articles from 100 news outlets with the greatest reach. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Numbers and percentages of articles containing COVID-19 vaccine misinformation over the study period. Further analysis by misinformation themes and whether articles included primary misinformation, fact-checking or simply referred to misinformation. RESULTS: 41 718 (3.2% of all COVID-19 vaccine articles) contained at least one of the vaccine misinformation themes based on the Boolean string developed for this study. The volume of such articles increased beginning in November 2020, but their percentage of all articles remained essentially stable after October 2020. 56.2% contained at least one mention of a safety theme, followed by development, production, and distribution (26.6%), and conspiracies (15.1%). Of 500 articles through January 2021 randomly selected from those identified by the Boolean string, 223 were not relevant, and 277 included either fact-checking (175 articles), refers to misinformation (87 articles) or primary misinformation (15 articles). In eight study weeks, the reach of these 277 articles (defined as visitors to the sites containing the articles) exceeded 250 million people. Fact-checking accounted for 69.6% of all reach for these articles and the number of such articles increased after November 2020. Overall, approximately 0.1% (95% CI 0.05% to 0.16%) of all articles on COVID-19 vaccines in our sample contained primary misinformation. CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 vaccine misinformation in traditional news media is uncommon but has the capacity to reach large numbers of readers and affect the vaccine conversation. Recent increases in fact-checking may counteract some of the misinformation currently circulating. BMJ Publishing Group 2022-06-01 /pmc/articles/PMC9160593/ /pubmed/35649595 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2021-058956 Text en © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Health Informatics
Lurie, Peter
Adams, Jordan
Lynas, Mark
Stockert, Karen
Carlyle, Robyn Correll
Pisani, Amy
Evanega, Sarah Davidson
COVID-19 vaccine misinformation in English-language news media: retrospective cohort study
title COVID-19 vaccine misinformation in English-language news media: retrospective cohort study
title_full COVID-19 vaccine misinformation in English-language news media: retrospective cohort study
title_fullStr COVID-19 vaccine misinformation in English-language news media: retrospective cohort study
title_full_unstemmed COVID-19 vaccine misinformation in English-language news media: retrospective cohort study
title_short COVID-19 vaccine misinformation in English-language news media: retrospective cohort study
title_sort covid-19 vaccine misinformation in english-language news media: retrospective cohort study
topic Health Informatics
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9160593/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35649595
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2021-058956
work_keys_str_mv AT luriepeter covid19vaccinemisinformationinenglishlanguagenewsmediaretrospectivecohortstudy
AT adamsjordan covid19vaccinemisinformationinenglishlanguagenewsmediaretrospectivecohortstudy
AT lynasmark covid19vaccinemisinformationinenglishlanguagenewsmediaretrospectivecohortstudy
AT stockertkaren covid19vaccinemisinformationinenglishlanguagenewsmediaretrospectivecohortstudy
AT carlylerobyncorrell covid19vaccinemisinformationinenglishlanguagenewsmediaretrospectivecohortstudy
AT pisaniamy covid19vaccinemisinformationinenglishlanguagenewsmediaretrospectivecohortstudy
AT evanegasarahdavidson covid19vaccinemisinformationinenglishlanguagenewsmediaretrospectivecohortstudy