Vicente Javier Clemente-Suárez, Eduardo Navarro-Jiménez, Juan Antonio Simón-Sanjurjo, Ana Isabel Beltran-Velasco, Carmen Cecilia Laborde-Cárdenas, Juan Camilo Benitez-Agudelo, Álvaro Bustamante-Sánchez, José Francisco Tornero-Aguilera
BACKGROUND: In this narrative review, we address the COVID-19 pandemic mis-dis information crisis in which healthcare systems have been pushed to their limits, with collapses occurring worldwide. The context of uncertainty has resulted in skepticism, confusion, and general malaise among the population. Informing the public has been one of the major challenges during this pandemic. Misinformation is defined as false information shared by people who have no intention of misleading others. Disinformation is defined as false information deliberately created and disseminated with malicious intentions.
OBJECTIVE: To reach a consensus and critical review about mis-dis information in COVID-19 crisis.
METHODS: A database search was conducted in PsychINFO, MedLine (Pubmed), Cochrane (Wiley), Embase and CinAhl. Databases used the MeSH-compliant keywords of COVID-19, 2019-nCoV, Coronavirus 2019, SARS-CoV-2, misinformation, disinformation, information, vaccines, vaccination, origin, target, spread, communication.
RESULTS: Both misinformation and disinformation can affect the population's confidence in vaccines (development, safety, and efficacy of vaccines, as well as denial of the severity of SARS-CoV infection). Institutions should take into account that a great part of the success of the intervention to combat a pandemic has a relationship with the power to stop the misinformation and disinformation processes. The response should be well-structured and addressed from different key points: central level and community level, with official and centralized communication channels. The approach should be multifactorial and enhanced by the collaboration of social media companies to stop misleading information, and trustworthy people both working or not working in the health care systems to boost the power of the message.
CONCLUSIONS: The response should be well-structured and addressed from different key points: central level and community level, with official and clearly centralized communication channels. The approach should be multifactorial and enhanced from the collaboration of social media companies to stop misleading information, and trustworthy people both working and not working in the health care systems to boost the power of a message based on scientific evidence.
