Complementary, alternative, and integrative medicine-specific COVID-19 misinformation on social media: A scoping review

Jeremy Y Ng; Shawn Liu; Ishana Maini; Will Pereira; Holger Cramer; David Moher

doi:10.1016/j.imr.2023.100975

Complementary, alternative, and integrative medicine-specific COVID-19 misinformation on social media: A scoping review

Integr Med Res. 2023 Sep;12(3):100975. doi: 10.1016/j.imr.2023.100975. Epub 2023 Jul 13.

Authors

Jeremy Y Ng^{1

2

3

4}, Shawn Liu², Ishana Maini², Will Pereira², Holger Cramer^{3

4}, David Moher^{1

5}

Affiliations

¹ Centre for Journalology, Ottawa Methods Centre, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
² Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact, Faculty of Health Sciences, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
³ Institute of General Practice and Interprofessional Care, University Hospital Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany.
⁴ Bosch Health Campus, Stuttgart, Germany.
⁵ School of Epidemiology and Public Health, Faculty of Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.

Abstract

Background: The sharing of health-related information has become increasingly popular on social media. Unregulated information sharing has led to the spread of misinformation, especially regarding complementary, alternative, and integrative medicine (CAIM). This scoping review synthesized evidence surrounding the spread of CAIM-related misinformation on social media during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Methods: This review was informed by a modified version of the Arksey and O'Malley scoping review framework. AMED, EMBASE, PsycINFO and MEDLINE databases were searched systematically from inception to January 2022. Eligible articles explored COVID-19 misinformation on social media and contained sufficient information on CAIM therapies. Common themes were identified using an inductive thematic analysis approach.

Results: Twenty-eight articles were included. The following themes were synthesized: 1) misinformation prompts unsafe and harmful behaviours, 2) misinformation can be separated into different categories, 3) individuals are capable of identifying and refuting CAIM misinformation, and 4) studies argue governments and social media companies have a responsibility to resolve the spread of COVID-19 misinformation.

Conclusions: Misinformation can spread more easily when shared on social media. Our review suggests that misinformation about COVID-19 related to CAIM that is disseminated online contributes to unsafe health behaviours, however, this may be remedied via public education initiatives and stricter media guidelines. The results of this scoping review are crucial to understanding the behavioural impacts of the spread of COVID-19 misinformation about CAIM therapies, and can inform the development of public health policies to mitigate these issues.

Keywords: Alternative medicine; COVID-19; Complementary; Integrative medicine; Misinformation; Social media.

Publication types

Review