Hot Topic Recognition of Health Rumors Based on Anti-Rumor Articles on the WeChat Official Account Platform: Topic Modeling

Cancer misinformation on social media

Social media is widely used globally by patients, families of patients, health professionals, scientists, and other stakeholders who seek and share information related to cancer. Despite many benefits of social media for cancer care and research, there is also a substantial risk of exposure to misinformation, or inaccurate information about cancer. Types of misinformation vary from inaccurate information about cancer risk factors or unproven treatment options to conspiracy theories and public relations articles or advertisements appearing as reliable medical content. Many characteristics of social media networks-such as their extensive use and the relative ease it allows to share information quickly-facilitate the spread of misinformation. Research shows that inaccurate and misleading health-related posts on social media often get more views and engagement (e.g., likes, shares) from users compared with accurate information. Exposure to misinformation can have downstream implications for health-related attitudes and behaviors. However, combatting misinformation is a complex process that requires engagement from media platforms, scientific and health experts, governmental organizations, and the general public. Cancer experts, for example, should actively combat misinformation in real time and should disseminate evidence-based content on social media. Health professionals should give information prescriptions to patients and families and support health literacy. Patients and families should vet the quality of cancer information before acting upon it (e.g., by using publicly available checklists) and seek recommended resources from health care providers and trusted organizations. Future multidisciplinary research is needed to identify optimal ways of building resilience and combating misinformation across social media.

Survival analysis of the duration of rumors during the COVID-19 pandemic

BACKGROUND

The emergence of the COVID-19 pandemic towards the end of 2019 triggered a relentless spread of online misinformation, which significantly impacted societal stability, public perception, and the effectiveness of measures to prevent and control the epidemic. Understanding the complex dynamics and characteristics that determine the duration of rumors is crucial for their effective management. In response to this urgent requirement, our study takes survival analysis method to analyze COVID-19 rumors comprehensively and rigorously. Our primary aim is to clarify the distribution patterns and key determinants of their persistence. Through this exploration, we aim to contribute to the development of robust rumor management strategies, thereby reducing the adverse effects of misinformation during the ongoing pandemic.

METHODS

The dataset utilized in this research was sourced from Tencent's "Jiao Zhen" Verification Platform's "Real-Time Debunking of Novel Coronavirus Pneumonia" system. We gathered a total of 754 instances of rumors from January 18, 2020, to January 17, 2023. The duration of each rumor was ascertained using the Baidu search engine. To analyze these rumors, survival analysis techniques were applied. The study focused on examining various factors that might influence the rumors' longevity, including the theme of the content, emotional appeal, the credibility of the source, and the mode of presentation.

RESULTS

Our study's results indicate that a rumor's lifecycle post-emergence typically progresses through three distinct phases: an initial rapid decline phase (0-25 days), followed by a stable phase (25-1000 days), and ultimately, an extinction phase (beyond 1000 days). It is observed that half of the rumors fade within the first 25 days, with an average duration of approximately 260.15 days. When compared to the baseline category of prevention and treatment rumors, the risk of dissipation is markedly higher in other categories: policy measures rumors are 3.58 times more likely to perish, virus information rumors have a 0.52 times higher risk, epidemic situation rumors are 4.86 times more likely to die out, and social current affairs rumors face a 2.02 times increased risk. Additionally, in comparison to wish rumors, bogie rumors and aggression rumors have 0.26 and 0.27 times higher risks of dying, respectively. In terms of presentation, graphical and video rumors share similar dissolution risks, whereas textual rumors tend to have a longer survival time. Interestingly, the credibility of the rumor's source does not significantly impact its longevity.

CONCLUSION

The survival time of rumors is strongly linked to their content theme and emotional appeal, whereas the credibility of the source and the format of presentation have a more auxiliary influence. This study recommends that government agencies should adopt specific strategies to counter rumors. Experts and scholars are encouraged to take an active role in spreading health knowledge. It's important for the public to proactively seek trustworthy sources for accurate information. Media platforms are advised to maintain journalistic integrity, verify the accuracy of information, and guide the public towards improved media literacy. These actions, collectively, can foster a collaborative alliance between the government and the media, effectively combating misinformation.