Objectives: Our purpose was to evaluate women's awareness of endometriosis and their ability to identify fake news about endometriosis on the internet. The second outcome was to identify those characteristics which make women more likely to believe in fake news.
Study Design: This prospective observational study was conducted at our academic outpatient clinic for endometriosis and pelvic pain. We enrolled 172 patients referred to our Center due to the suspicion of endometriosis, who were asked to fill in a two-part questionnaire. The first part included socio-demographic information, the evaluation of anxiety status (STAI Y6 and GAD-7), and endometriosis related-symptoms (EHP-5). The second part of the questionnaire was about fake news: women were asked whether they had encountered six different statings when searching the Internet, and to judge the likelihood that those 6 topics were true.
Results: 76.3% of patients found fake news about endometriosis online. Higher STAI-Y6 scores were associated with a higher risk of finding fake news about endometriosis (OR 1.05, 95% C.I. 1.01-1.09, p = 0.013). More than half of patients who came across the news regarding the impossibility of obtaining pregnancy for women affected by endometriosis considered this news moderately or highly credible, 6% of them even considered it completely plausible. No demographic characteristics were associated with thehigher perceived plausibility of the fake news.
Conclusion: Gynecologists should be aware that some hot topics concerning endometriosis are widely talked about on the web and that many statements found online have no scientific base. Through this knowledge physicians could more easily engage patients by acquiring important insight into their main concerns and doubts, and could provide women with reliable and correct information regarding their disease, dissipating doubts and misconceptions.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejogrb.2022.05.020 | DOI Listing |
Camb Q Healthc Ethics
January 2025
Erasmus School of Law and Erasmus School of Health Policy & Management, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Who should decide what passes for disinformation in a liberal democracy? During the COVID-19 pandemic, a committee set up by the Dutch Ministry of Health was actively blocking disinformation. The committee comprised civil servants, communication experts, public health experts, and representatives of commercial online platforms such as Facebook, Twitter, and LinkedIn. To a large extent, vaccine hesitancy was attributed to disinformation, defined as misinformation (or data misinterpreted) with harmful intent.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFCommun Psychol
January 2025
School of Psychological Science, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
The generation and distribution of hyper-partisan content on social media has gained millions of exposure across platforms, often allowing malevolent actors to influence and disrupt democracies. The spread of this content is facilitated by real users' engaging with it on platforms. The current study tests the efficacy of an 'inoculation' intervention via six online survey-based experiments in the UK and US.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFJ Infect Dev Ctries
December 2024
Faculdade de Medicina de Campos, Campos dos Goytacazes, Brazil.
Introduction: Despite efforts by health organizations to share evidence-based information, fake news hindered the promotion of social distancing and vaccination during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. This study analyzed COVID-19 knowledge and practices in a vulnerable area in northern Rio de Janeiro, acknowledging the influence of the complex social and economic landscape on public health perceptions.
Methodology: This cross-sectional study was conducted in Novo Eldorado - a low-income, conflict-affected neighborhood in Campos dos Goytacazes - using a structured questionnaire, following the peak of COVID-19 deaths in Brazil (July-December 2021).
R Soc Open Sci
January 2025
Arizona State University, Glendale, AZ, USA.
Numerous psychological findings have shown that incidental exposure to ideas makes those ideas seem more true, a finding commonly referred to as the 'illusory truth' effect. Under many accounts of the illusory truth effect, initial exposure to a statement provides a metacognitive feeling of 'fluency' or familiarity that, upon subsequent exposure, leads people to infer that the statement is more likely to be true. However, genuine beliefs do not only affect truth judgements about individual statements, they also imply other beliefs and drive decision-making.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFEnter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!