J Korean Med Sci.  2020 Jul;35(27):e256. 10.3346/jkms.2020.35.e256.

Information and Misinformation on COVID-19: a Cross-Sectional Survey Study

Affiliations
  • 1Department of Clinical Immunology and Rheumatology, Sanjay Gandhi Postgraduate Institute of Medical Sciences, Lucknow, India
  • 2Departments of Rheumatology and Research and Development, Dudley Group NHS Foundation Trust (Teaching Trust of the University of Birmingham, UK), Russells Hall Hospital, Dudley, West Midlands, UK
  • 3Department of Internal Medicine No. 2, Danylo Halytsky Lviv National Medical University, Lviv, Ukraine
  • 4Department of Biology and Biochemistry, South Kazakhstan Medical Academy, Shymkent, Kazakhstan

Abstract

Background
The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has led to a large volume of publications, a barrage of non-reviewed preprints on various professional repositories and a slew of retractions in a short amount of time.
Methods
We conducted an e-survey using a cloud-based website to gauge the potential sources of trustworthy information and misinformation and analyzed researchers', clinicians', and academics' attitude toward unpublished items, and pre- and post-publication quality checks in this challenging time.
Results
Among 128 respondents (mean age, 43.2 years; M:F, 1.1:1), 60 (46.9%) were scholarly journal editors and editorial board members. Social media channels were distinguished as the most important sources of information as well as misinformation (81 [63.3%] and 86 [67.2%]). Nearly two in five (62, 48.4%) respondents blamed reviewers, editors, and misinterpretation by readers as additional contributors alongside authors for misinformation. A higher risk of plagiarism was perceived by the majority (70, 58.6%), especially plagiarism of ideas (64.1%) followed by inappropriate paraphrasing (54.7%). Opinion was divided on the utility of preprints for changing practice and changing retraction rates during the pandemic period, and higher rejections were not supported by most (76.6%) while the importance of peer review was agreed upon by a majority (80, 62.5%). More stringent screening by journal editors (61.7%), and facilitating open access plagiarism software (59.4%), including Artificial Intelligence (AI)-based algorithms (43.8%) were among the suggested solutions. Most (74.2%) supported the need to launch a specialist bibliographic database for COVID-19, with information indexed (62.3%), available as open-access (82.8%), after expanding search terms (52.3%) and following due verification by academics (66.4%), and journal editors (52.3%).
Conclusion
While identifying social media as a potential source of misinformation on COVID-19, and a perceived high risk of plagiarism, more stringent peer review and skilled post-publication promotion are advisable. Journal editors should play a more active role in streamlining publication and promotion of trustworthy information on COVID-19.

Keyword

Coronavirus Disease 2019; COVID-19; Information; Publishing; Social Media; Periodicals as Topic

Figure

  • Fig. 1 Perception of sources of misinformation, plagiarism, and reliability of preprints by physicians and academics.COVID-19 = coronavirus disease 2019.


Cited by  11 articles

Letter to the Editor: Social Media Is a Double-Edged Sword in the COVID-19 Pandemic
Sakir Ahmed
J Korean Med Sci. 2020;35(29):e270.    doi: 10.3346/jkms.2020.35.e270.

Fundamental Shifts in Research, Ethics and Peer Review in the Era of the COVID-19 Pandemic
Edward Barroga, Glafera Janet Matanguihan
J Korean Med Sci. 2020;35(45):e395.    doi: 10.3346/jkms.2020.35.e395.

Reporting Survey Based Studies – a Primer for Authors
Prithvi Sanjeevkumar Gaur, Olena Zimba, Vikas Agarwal, Latika Gupta
J Korean Med Sci. 2020;35(45):e398.    doi: 10.3346/jkms.2020.35.e398.

COVID-19 Vaccination and the Challenge of Infodemic and Disinformation
Fareeha Farooq, Farooq Azam Rathore
J Korean Med Sci. 2021;36(10):e78.    doi: 10.3346/jkms.2021.36.e78.

Lessons Learned from Publicizing and Retracting an Erroneous Hypothesis on the Mumps, Measles, Rubella (MMR) Vaccination with Unethical Implications
Hiba Khan, Armen Yuri Gasparyan, Latika Gupta
J Korean Med Sci. 2021;36(19):e126.    doi: 10.3346/jkms.2021.36.e126.

Letter to the Editor: COVID-19 ‘Solutions’ in Bangladesh
Md. Sayeed Al-Zaman
J Korean Med Sci. 2021;36(22):e160.    doi: 10.3346/jkms.2021.36.e160.

Modern Health Journalism and the Impact of Social Media
Keya Ganatra, Armen Yuri Gasparyan, Latika Gupta
J Korean Med Sci. 2021;36(22):e162.    doi: 10.3346/jkms.2021.36.e162.

Plagiarism in Non-Anglophone Countries: a Cross-sectional Survey of Researchers and Journal Editors
Latika Gupta, Javeria Tariq, Marlen Yessirkepov, Olena Zimba, Durga Prasanna Misra, Vikas Agarwal, Armen Yuri Gasparyan
J Korean Med Sci. 2021;36(39):e247.    doi: 10.3346/jkms.2021.36.e247.

Harnessing the True Power of Altmetrics to Track Engagement
Sarah Saud, Lisa Traboco, Latika Gupta
J Korean Med Sci. 2021;36(48):e330.    doi: 10.3346/jkms.2021.36.e330.

Formulating Hypotheses for Different Study Designs
Durga Prasanna Misra, Armen Yuri Gasparyan, Olena Zimba, Marlen Yessirkepov, Vikas Agarwal, George D. Kitas
J Korean Med Sci. 2021;36(50):e338.    doi: 10.3346/jkms.2021.36.e338.

GPTZero Performance in Identifying Artificial Intelligence-Generated Medical Texts: A Preliminary Study
Farrokh Habibzadeh
J Korean Med Sci. 2023;38(38):e319.    doi: 10.3346/jkms.2023.38.e319.


Reference

1. Gasparyan AY, Misra DP, Yessirkepov M, Zimba O. Perspectives of immune therapy in coronavirus disease 2019. J Korean Med Sci. 2020; 35(18):e176. PMID: 32383371.
Article
2. Fleming N. Coronavirus misinformation, and how scientists can help to fight it. Updated June 24, 2020. Accessed June 25, 2020. https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-01834-3.
3. Gupta L, Misra DP, Agarwal V, Balan S, Agarwal V. Management of rheumatic diseases in the time of COVID-19 pandemic: perspectives of rheumatology practitioners from India. Ann Rheum Dis. Forthcoming. 2020; DOI: 10.1136/annrheumdis-2020-217509.
Article
4. Llewellyn S. Covid-19: how to be careful with trust and expertise on social media. BMJ. 2020; 368:m1160. PMID: 32213480.
Article
5. Goel A, Gupta L. Social media in the times of COVID-19. J Clin Rheumatol. Forthcoming. 2020; DOI: 10.1097/RHU.0000000000001508.
Article
6. Ledford H, Van Noorden R. High-profile coronavirus retractions raise concerns about data oversight. Nature. 2020; 582(7811):160–160. PMID: 32504025.
Article
7. Bauchner H, Golub RM, Zylke J. Editorial concern—Possible reporting of the same patients with COVID-19 in different reports. JAMA. 2020; 323(13):1256.
Article
8. Eysenbach G. Improving the quality of web surveys: the checklist for reporting results of internet e-surveys (CHERRIES). J Med Internet Res. 2004; 6(3):e34. PMID: 15471760.
Article
9. Gasparyan AY, Yessirkepov M, Voronov AA, Koroleva AM, Kitas GD. Comprehensive approach to open access publishing: platforms and tools. J Korean Med Sci. 2019; 34(27):e184. PMID: 31293109.
Article
10. Gasparyan AY, Yessirkepov M, Voronov AA, Gerasimov AN, Kostyukova EI, Kitas GD. Preserving the integrity of citations and references by all stakeholders of science communication. J Korean Med Sci. 2015; 30(11):1545–1552. PMID: 26538996.
Article
11. Kwon D. How swamped preprint servers are blocking bad coronavirus research. Nature. 2020; 581(7807):130–131. PMID: 32382120.
Article
12. Callaway E. Will the pandemic permanently alter scientific publishing? Nature. 2020; 582(7811):167–168. PMID: 32504015.
Article
13. Glasziou PP, Sanders S, Hoffmann T. Waste in covid-19 research. BMJ. 2020; 369:m1847. PMID: 32398241.
14. Misra D, Agarwal V. To act…….or to wait for the evidence: ethics in the time of covid-19! Indian J Rheumatol. 2020; 15(1):3–4.
Article
15. World Health Organization. Countering misinformation about COVID-19. Updated May 13, 2020. Accessed June 25, 2020. https://www.who.int/news-room/feature-stories/detail/countering-misinformation-about-covid-19.
16. Pazzanese C. Battling the ‘pandemic of misinformation.’. Updated May 8, 2020. Accessed June 25, 2020. https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2020/05/social-media-used-to-spread-create-covid-19-falsehoods/.
17. Retraction Watch. Lancet, NEJM retract controversial COVID-19 studies based on Surgisphere data. Updated June 4, 2020. Accessed June 25, 2020. https://retractionwatch.com/2020/06/04/lancet-retracts-controversial-hydroxychloroquine-study/.
18. Gasparyan AY, Ayvazyan L, Akazhanov NA, Kitas GD. Self-correction in biomedical publications and the scientific impact. Croat Med J. 2014; 55(1):61–72. PMID: 24577829.
Article
19. Gasparyan AY, Gerasimov AN, Voronov AA, Kitas GD. Rewarding peer reviewers: maintaining the integrity of science communication. J Korean Med Sci. 2015; 30(4):360–364. PMID: 25829801.
20. Gewin V. Retractions: a clean slate. Nature. 2014; 507(7492):389–391. PMID: 24654274.
Article
21. Heaven D. AI peer reviewers unleashed to ease publishing grind. Nature. 2018; 563(7733):609–610. PMID: 30482927.
Article
22. Gang L, Quan Z, Guang L. Cross-language plagiarism detection based on WordNet. In : Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Innovation in Artificial Intelligence - ICIAI ’18; Shanghai, China: ACM Press;2018. p. 163–168.
23. Zimba O, Radchenko O, Strilchuk L. Social media for research, education and practice in rheumatology. Rheumatol Int. 2020; 40(2):183–190. PMID: 31863133.
Article
24. Ahmed S, Gupta L. Perception about social media use by rheumatology journals: survey among the attendees of IRACON 2019. Indian J Rheumatol. Forthcoming. 2020; DOI: 10.4103/injr.injr_15_20.
Article
25. WhatsApp. How WhatsApp can help you stay connected during the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic. Updated 2020. Accessed June 25, 2020. https://www.whatsapp.com/coronavirus/.
Full Text Links
  • JKMS
Actions
Cited
CITED
export Copy
Close
Share
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
Similar articles
Copyright © 2024 by Korean Association of Medical Journal Editors. All rights reserved.     E-mail: koreamed@kamje.or.kr