Experience of Health Professionals with Misinformation and Its Impact on Their Job Practice (Preprint)

Author:

Kbaier DhouhaORCID,Ismail NashwaORCID,Farrell TracieORCID,Kane Annemarie

Abstract

UNSTRUCTURED

The qualitative research presented in this paper investigates the outbreaks of diseases where a great amount of health-threatening misinformation is produced and released. Misinformation is often disseminated through social media, where information is spread rapidly and easily. As part of the pilot study, we examined the misinformation surrounding the Covid-19 outbreak to determine how it may have impacted practitioners' perceptions of misinformation, and how that may have influenced their practice. In particular, this study explored the answers to the following questions: How do health professionals respond when they discover a patient has been misinformed? What do they believe is the most impactful misinformation on healthcare practice? Are health professionals' practices changing as a result of misinformation? Are there any practices that were shaped by healthcare practitioners' perceptions of misinformation and its impact? Did they take any action or intervene in any way? What was the result of their action or intervention? Research findings indicate that Health Practitioners (HPs) view misinformation in different ways according to the scenario in which it occurs; some HPs consider it to be an acute incident exacerbated by the pandemic, while others see it as an ongoing phenomenon (always present) and are addressing it as part of their daily work. Considering that misinformation is primarily a result of the availability and accessibility of information, HPs reported their experiences with the current reliable and valid information available. At this point, HPS presented a range of perspectives on the available and trusted information sources. For them, reliable information may be available but outdated, untrusted by patients. HPs are developing pathways for dealing with misinformation. Two main pathways have been identified according to the research findings; first, to educate the patient through coaching, advising, or patronising. The second step is to devote resources such as time and effort to facilitate two-way communication between the patient and the healthcare provider through listening and talking to them. When it comes to the practicality and feasibility of the above pathways, HPs explained that there are a number of factors that play an important role in the treatment of misinformation. Last but not least, HPs mentioned challenges associated with misinformation and treatment, such as limited time and increased workload. Additionally, social media serves as a powerful echo chamber and word-of-mouth distribution medium. A surprising number of HPs have linked poor patient-HP communication and the difficulty in reaching HPs with the increasing use of social media. As a final recommendation, some Health Professionals suggest including the patient's voice and listening to their interpretations and explanations of the misinformation they receive and how they deal with it.

Publisher

JMIR Publications Inc.

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3