Science is frequently used and distorted to advance political, economic, or cultural agendas. The politicization of science can limit the positive impacts that scientific advances can offer when people reject sound and beneficial scientific advice. Politicization has undoubtedly contributed to hesitancy toward uptake of the COVID-19 vaccine. It is urgent for scientists and clinicians to better understand: (1) the roots of politicization as related to COVID-19 vaccines; (2) the factors that influence people's receptivity to scientific misinformation in politicized contexts; and (3) how to combat the politicization of science to increase the use of life-saving vaccines. This chapter explores these issues in the context of COVID-19 vaccine resistance in the United States. After briefly describing the development of the vaccines, we describe the ways in which the disease itself became politicized because of statements by political leaders and also by media accounts including social media. We then review the politicization of the vaccine at both national and international scales, variability in public acceptance of the vaccines in the United States, and response to the emergence of variants. The next section summarizes social science findings on overcoming vaccine resistance, and the concluding section outlines some of the lessons of the politicization of the disease and the vaccine for health practitioners and life scientists. 

Politicization and COVID-19 vaccine resistance in the U.S.

To compare and summarize the literature regarding infodemics and health misinformation, and to identify challenges and opportunities for addressing the issues of infodemics.We searched MEDLINE®, Embase®, Cochrane Library of Systematic Reviews, Scopus and Epistemonikos on 6 May 2022 for systematic reviews analysing infodemics, misinformation, disinformation and fake news related to health. We grouped studies based on similarity and retrieved evidence on challenges and opportunities. We used the AMSTAR 2 approach to assess the reviews' methodological quality. To evaluate the quality of the evidence, we used the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation guidelines.Our search identified 31 systematic reviews, of which 17 were published. The proportion of health-related misinformation on social media ranged from 0.2% to 28.8%. Twitter, Facebook, YouTube and Instagram are critical in disseminating the rapid and far-reaching information. The most negative consequences of health misinformation are the increase of misleading or incorrect interpretations of available evidence, impact on mental health, misallocation of health resources and an increase in vaccination hesitancy. The increase of unreliable health information delays care provision and increases the occurrence of hateful and divisive rhetoric. Social media could also be a useful tool to combat misinformation during crises. Included reviews highlight the poor quality of published studies during health crises.Available evidence suggests that infodemics during health emergencies have an adverse effect on society. Multisectoral actions to counteract infodemics and health misinformation are needed, including developing legal policies, creating and promoting awareness campaigns, improving health-related content in mass media and increasing people's digital and health literacy.Comparer et synthétiser la littérature consacrée à l'infodémie et à la désinformation sanitaire, mais aussi identifier les défis et opportunités inhérents à la lutte contre cette problématique.Nous avons exploré les bases de données MEDLINE®, Embase®, Cochrane Library of Systematic Reviews, Scopus et Epistemonikos le 6 mai 2022 à la recherche de revues systématiques analysant les infodémies, la désinformation, les fausses informations et les «fake news» liées à la santé. Nous avons ensuite regroupé les études en fonction de leurs similitudes et en avons extrait des éléments probants relatifs aux défis et opportunités. Nous avons employé l'approche AMSTAR-2 afin de mesurer la qualité méthodologique des différentes revues. Enfin, pour évaluer la qualité des éléments probants, nous avons utilisé les critères du système GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation, soit «grade donné aux recommandations, examen, élaboration et évaluation»).Nos recherches nous ont permis de dénicher 31 revues systématiques, dont 17 ont été publiées. Sur les réseaux sociaux, le pourcentage d'informations fallacieuses concernant la santé était compris entre 0,2 et 28,8%. Twitter, Facebook, YouTube et Instagram jouent un rôle prépondérant dans la propagation rapide d'informations à grande échelle. Cette désinformation entraîne de multiples conséquences négatives: hausse du nombre d'interprétations erronées ou trompeuses des preuves existantes, impact sur la santé mentale, mauvaise affectation des ressources en santé et méfiance croissante vis-à-vis de la vaccination. La prolifération des informations sanitaires non fiables retarde la prise en charge tout en alimentant les réticences et les discours clivants. Néanmoins, les réseaux sociaux peuvent aussi se révéler utiles dans la lutte contre la désinformation lors des crises. Les revues examinées soulignent la qualité médiocre des études publiées durant les crises sanitaires.Tout porte à croire que les infodémies qui surgissent dans le cadre des urgences sanitaires sont néfastes pour la société. Des actions multisectorielles sont nécessaires pour combattre les fausses informations, notamment le développement de politiques juridiques, l'élaboration et le déploiement de campagnes de sensibilisation, l'amélioration des contenus dédiés à la santé dans les médias de masse, et une meilleure éducation à la culture numérique et à la santé.Comparar y resumir la literatura relacionada con la infodemia y la información errónea sobre la salud, e identificar los desafíos y las oportunidades para abordar los problemas de la infodemia.Se realizaron búsquedas en MEDLINE®, Embase®, la Biblioteca Cochrane de Revisiones Sistemáticas, Scopus y Epistemonikos el 6 de mayo de 2022 para obtener revisiones sistemáticas que analizaran la infodemia, la información errónea, la desinformación y las noticias falsas relacionadas con la salud. Se agruparon los estudios en función de la similitud y se recuperaron las pruebas sobre los desafíos y las oportunidades. Se utilizó el enfoque AMSTAR-2 para valorar la calidad metodológica de las revisiones. Además, para evaluar la calidad de las pruebas, se utilizaron los criterios del sistema GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation, o bien, el grado asignado a las recomendaciones, la valoración, el desarrollo y la evaluación).Nuestra búsqueda identificó 31 revisiones sistemáticas, de las que 17 estaban publicadas. El porcentaje de información errónea relacionada con la salud en las redes sociales osciló entre el 0,2 y el 28,8 %. Twitter, Facebook, YouTube e Instagram son fundamentales en la difusión de la información rápida y de gran alcance. Las consecuencias más negativas de la información errónea sobre la salud son el aumento de las interpretaciones engañosas o incorrectas de las pruebas disponibles, el impacto en la salud mental, la asignación inadecuada de los recursos sanitarios y el aumento de las dudas sobre la vacunación. El aumento de la información sanitaria poco fiable retrasa la prestación de cuidados y aumenta la aparición de una retórica de rechazo y división. Por otra parte, los medios sociales podrían ser una herramienta útil para combatir la información errónea durante las crisis. Las revisiones incluidas destacan la mala calidad de los estudios publicados durante las crisis sanitarias.Las pruebas disponibles sugieren que la infodemia durante las emergencias sanitarias tiene un efecto adverso en la sociedad. Se necesitan acciones multisectoriales para contrarrestar la infodemia y la información errónea sobre la salud, como el desarrollo de políticas legales, la creación y promoción de campañas de sensibilización, la mejora de los contenidos relacionados con la salud en los medios de comunicación y el aumento de la alfabetización digital y sanitaria de la población.مقارنة وتلخيص المنشورات المتعلقة بالمعلومات غير الدقيقة والمعلومات الصحية الخاطئة، وتحديد التحديات والفرص لمواجهة مشكلات المعلومات غير الدقيقة.قمنا بالبحث في MEDLINE®‎، وEmbase®‎، ومكتبة Cochrane للمراجعات المنهجية، وScopus، وEpistemonikos، في 6 مايو/أيار 2022 عن المراجعات المنهجية التي تحلل المعلومات غير الدقيقة، والمعلومات الخاطئة، والمعلومات المضللة، والأخبار الملفقة المتعلقة بالصحة. قمنا بتجميع الدراسات على أساس التشابه، واسترجعنا الأدلة على التحديات والفرص. وقمنا بالاستعانة بأسلوب AMSTAR-2 لتقييم الجودة المنهجية للمراجعات. لتقييم جودة الأدلة، قمنا بالاستعانة بتصنيف تقييم التوصيات (Grading of Recommendations Assessment)، وبالإرشادات الخاصة بالتطوير والتقييم (Development and Evaluation).حدد البحث الذي قمنا به عدد 31 مراجعة منهجية، تم نشر 17 منها. تراوحت نسبة المعلومات الخاطئة المتعلقة بالصحة على وسائل التواصل الاجتماعي من 0.2% إلى 28.8%. تعد كل من منصات Twitter، وFacebook، وYouTube، وInstagram، منصات أساسية في نشر المعلومات السريعة وبعيدة الانتشار. تتمثل أكثر العواقب السلبية للمعلومات الصحية الخاطئة في زيادة التفسيرات المضللة أو غير الصحيحة للأدلة المتاحة، والتأثير على الصحة العقلية، وسوء تخصيص الموارد الصحية، وزيادة في التردد بخصوص التحصين. تؤدي زيادة المعلومات الصحية غير الموثوقة إلى تأخير تقديم الرعاية، وتزيد من حدوث خطاب الكراهية والانقسام. يمكن أن تكون وسائل التواصل الاجتماعي أيضًا أداة مفيدة لمواجهة المعلومات الخاطئة أثناء الأزمات. تسلط المراجعات المتضمنة الضوء على الجودة المنخفضة للدراسات المنشورة أثناء الأزمات الصحية.تشير الأدلة المتاحة إلى أن المعلومات غير الدقيقة أثناء حالات الطوارئ الصحية لها تأثير سلبي على المجتمع. هناك حاجة إلى إجراءات متعددة القطاعات لمواجهة المعلومات غير الدقيقة والمعلومات الصحية الخاطئة، بما في ذلك تطوير السياسات القانونية، وإطلاق حملات للتوعية وترويجها، وتحسين المحتوى المتعلق بالصحة في وسائل الإعلام، وزيادة المعرفة الرقمية والصحية للأشخاص.比较和总结与信息流行病和健康错误信息有关的文献,并确定在解决信息流行病问题方面所面临的挑战和机遇。.我们已于 2022 年 5 月 6 日搜索了 MEDLINE®、Embase®、Cochrane 系统评价图书馆、Scopus 和 Epistemonikos,通过分析信息流行病以及与健康相关的错误信息、虚假信息和假新闻,完成了系统评价。我们基于相似性对研究进行了分组,并检索了与挑战和机遇有关的证据。我们使用 AMSTAR-2 方法来评估审查的方法学质量。为了评估证据的质量,我们使用了《推荐意见评估、制定和评价分级指南》。.经搜索,我们发现了 31 篇系统评价,其中 17 篇已发表。社交媒体上健康相关错误信息的比例占 0.2% 至 28.8% 不等。推特网 (Twitter)、脸书 (Facebook)、YouTube 和 Instagram 是致使信息得以快速传播并造成深远影响的重要渠道。健康错误信息导致的最严重负面影响是对现有证据的误导或错误理解进一步加剧、对心理健康造成不利影响、导致卫生资源分配错误以及导致疫苗接种犹豫人群的比例增加。不可靠健康信息的增加导致护理服务延迟提供且反对和分裂言论增多。社交媒体也可成为在危机期间打击错误信息的有用工具。有些评论强调,健康危机期间所公布的研究质量较差。.现有证据表明,卫生突发事件期间信息流行病对社会产生了不利影响。需要多个部门共同行动以抵制信息流行病和健康错误信息,包括制定法律政策、创建和推广意识活动、加强对大众媒体健康相关内容的管理以及提高人们的数字和健康素养。.Сопоставить и обобщить литературу по инфодемии и дезинформации в области здравоохранения, а также определить сложные задачи и возможности для решения проблем инфодемии.6 мая 2022 г. авторы выполнили поиск информации в базе данных MEDLINE®, Embase®, Cochrane Library of Systematic Reviews, Scopus и Epistemonikos на предмет систематических обзоров, анализирующих инфодемию, ложную информацию, дезинформацию и фейковые новости о здравоохранении. Авторы сгруппировали исследования на основе сходства и получили данные о сложных задачах и возможностях. Авторы использовали подход AMSTAR-2 для оценки методологического качества обзоров. Для оценки качества данных авторы использовали Руководство по ранжированию оценки, разработки и экспертизы рекомендаций.Поиск выявил 31 систематический обзор, 17 из которых были опубликованы. Доля дезинформации в области здравоохранения в социальных сетях колебалась от 0,2 до 28,8%. Twitter, Facebook, YouTube и Instagram играют решающую роль в быстром и широкомасштабном распространении информации. Наиболее негативными последствиями дезинформации в области здравоохранения являются увеличение количества вводящих в заблуждение или неверных интерпретаций имеющихся данных, воздействие на психическое здоровье, нерациональное использование ресурсов в сфере здравоохранения и усиление сомнений в необходимости вакцинации. Увеличение количества недостоверной информации в области здоровья задерживает оказание медицинской помощи и увеличивает количество проявлений ненависти и разногласий. Социальные сети также могут быть полезным инструментом для борьбы с дезинформацией во время кризисов. Во всех включенных обзорах подчеркивается низкое качество опубликованных исследований во время кризисов в области здравоохранения.Имеющиеся данные свидетельствуют о том, что инфодемия во время чрезвычайных ситуаций в области здравоохранения оказывает неблагоприятное воздействие на общество. Необходимы многосекторальные действия по противодействию инфодемии и дезинформации в области здравоохранения, включая разработку правовой политики, создание и продвижение кампаний по повышению осведомленности, улучшение контента, связанного со здоровьем, в средствах массовой информации и повышение цифровой и медицинской грамотности населения. 

Infodemics and health misinformation: a systematic review of reviews

The spread of fake news increased dramatically during the COVID-19 pandemic worldwide. This study aims to synthesize the extant literature to understand the magnitude of this phenomenon in the wake of the pandemic in 2021, focusing on the motives and sociodemographic profiles, Artificial Intelligence (AI)-based tools developed, and the top trending topics related to fake news. A scoping review was adopted targeting articles published in five academic databases (January 2021-November 2021), resulting in 97 papers. Most of the studies were empirical in nature (N = 69) targeting the general population (N = 26) and social media users (N = 13), followed by AI-based detection tools (N = 27). Top motives for fake news sharing include low awareness, knowledge, and health/media literacy, Entertainment/Pass Time/Socialization, Altruism, and low trust in government/news media, whilst the phenomenon was more prominent among those with low education, males and younger. Machine and deep learning emerged to be the widely explored techniques in detecting fake news, whereas top topics were related to vaccine, virus, cures/remedies, treatment, and prevention. Immediate intervention and prevention efforts are needed to curb this anti-social behavior considering the world is still struggling to contain the spread of the COVID-19 virus. 

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2022.103144

Infodemic and fake news – A comprehensive overview of its global magnitude during the COVID-19 pandemic in 2021: A scoping review

The COVID-19 pandemic and the resulting societal restrictions have had negative implications for mental health in the general population. The aims of the present longitudinal study were (i) to investigate changes in psychopathological symptoms and psychological well-being in a sample of Italian individuals surveyed at different points of the pandemic and (ii) to evaluate the potential risk and protective factors associated with the psychopathological outcomes. Self-reported data on psychiatric symptoms, and psychological well-being were collected in March 2020 (T0, the lockdown phase), in May 2020 (T1, the end of the lockdown phase), and in November 2020 (T2, the second wave of COVID-19 infection). 1258 participants (Mage=23.43, SDage=6.45; 75.4% female) were recruited at T0. Of these, 712 also completed the T1 survey, and 369 also completed the T2 survey. A significant decrease in anxiety, depressive, posttraumatic, and obsessive-compulsive symptoms and a significant increase in psychological well-being were observed from T0 to T1. All psychopathological symptoms increased, and psychological well-being decreased significantly from T1 to T2. Several demographic, psychological and COVID-19-related factors emerged as predictors over the course of the pandemic. The current findings indicated that psychological health covaried with the intensity of the COVID-19 pandemic and the associated societal restrictions. 

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2022.114705

Effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on psychological health in a sample of Italian adults: A three-wave longitudinal study

• Empathy work as a key mechanism of information processing in human-AI interaction. • Five types of Replika experiences among Chinese female users are found. • Varying degrees of cognitive empathy, affective empathy and empathic response are involved in human-AI interaction. • Mediated empathy facilitates resilience processes and enhance well-being. • Implications for global recovery from the COVID-19 pandemic are discussed. As a global health crisis, the COVID-19 pandemic has also made heavy mental and emotional tolls become shared experiences of global communities, especially among females who were affected more by the pandemic than males for anxiety and depression. By connecting multiple facets of empathy as key mechanisms of information processing with the communication theory of resilience, the present study examines human-AI interactions during the COVID-19 pandemic in order to understand digitally mediated empathy and how the intertwining of empathic and communicative processes of resilience works as coping strategies for COVID-19 disruption. Mixed methods were adopted to explore the using experiences and effects of Replika, a chatbot companion powered by AI, with ethnographic research, in-depth interviews, and grounded theory-based analysis. Findings of this research extend empathy theories from interpersonal communication to human-AI interactions and show five types of digitally mediated empathy among Chinese female Replika users with varying degrees of cognitive empathy, affective empathy, and empathic response involved in the information processing processes, i.e., companion buddy, responsive diary, emotion-handling program, electronic pet, and tool for venting. When processing information obtained from AI and collaborative interactions with the AI chatbot, multiple facets of mediated empathy become unexpected pathways to resilience and enhance users’ well-being. This study fills the research gap by exploring empathy and resilience processes in human-AI interactions. Practical implications, especially for increasing individuals’ psychological resilience as an important component of global recovery from the pandemic, suggestions for future chatbot design, and future research directions are also discussed. 

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9428597

Chatbot as an emergency exist: Mediated empathy for resilience via human-AI interaction during the COVID-19 pandemic

An unprecedented infodemic has been witnessed to create massive damage to human society. However, it was not thoroughly investigated. This systematic review aims to (1) synthesize the existing literature on the causes and impacts of COVID-19 infodemic; (2) summarize the proposed strategies to fight with COVID-19 infodemic; and (3) identify the directions for future research. A systematic literature search following the PRISMA guideline covering 12 scholarly databases was conducted to retrieve various types of peer-reviewed articles that reported causes, impacts, or countermeasures of the infodemic. Empirical studies were assessed for risk of bias using the Mixed-Methods Appraisal Tool. A coding theme was iteratively developed to categorize the causes, impacts, and countermeasures found from the included studies. Social media usage, low level of health/eHealth literacy, and fast publication process and preprint service are identified as the major causes of the infodemic. Besides, the vicious circle of human rumor-spreading behavior and the psychological issues from the public (e.g., anxiety, distress, fear) emerges as the characteristic of the infodemic. Comprehensive lists of countermeasures are summarized from different perspectives, among which risk communication and consumer health information need/seeking are of particular importance. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed and future research directions are suggested.

Jianxing Chi

Papers

The causes, impacts and countermeasures of COVID-19 “Infodemic”: A systematic review using narrative synthesis