实施科学概念在错误信息研究中的应用:范围综述。

IF 2.7 3区 医学 Q2 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH Health Education & Behavior Pub Date : 2024-12-18 DOI:10.1177/10901981241303871
Carla Bang, Kelly Carroll, Niyati Mistry, Justin Presseau, Natasha Hudek, Sezgi Yanikomeroglu, Jamie C Brehaut
{"title":"实施科学概念在错误信息研究中的应用:范围综述。","authors":"Carla Bang, Kelly Carroll, Niyati Mistry, Justin Presseau, Natasha Hudek, Sezgi Yanikomeroglu, Jamie C Brehaut","doi":"10.1177/10901981241303871","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Misinformation hinders the impact of public health initiatives. Efforts to counter misinformation likely do not consider the full range of factors known to affect how individuals make decisions and act on them. Implementation science tools and concepts can facilitate the development of more effective interventions against health misinformation by leveraging advances in behavior specification, uptake of evidence, and theory-guided development and evaluation of complex interventions. We conducted a scoping review of misinformation literature reviews to document whether and how important concepts from implementation science have already informed the study of misinformation. Of 90 included reviews, the most frequently identified implementation science concepts were consideration of mechanisms driving misinformation (78%) and ways to intervene on, reduce, avoid, or circumvent it (71%). Other implementation science concepts were discussed much less frequently, such as tailoring strategies to the relevant context (9%) or public involvement in intervention development (9%). Less than half of reviews (47%) were guided by any theory, model, or framework. Among the 26 reviews that cited existing theories, most used theory narratively (62%) or only mentioned/cited the theory (19%), rather than using theory explicitly to interpret results (15%) or to inform data extraction (12%). Despite considerable research and many summaries of how to intervene against health misinformation, there has been relatively little consideration of many important advances in the science of health care implementation. This review identifies key areas from implementation science that might be useful to support future research into designing effective misinformation interventions.</p>","PeriodicalId":12974,"journal":{"name":"Health Education & Behavior","volume":" ","pages":"10901981241303871"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Use of Implementation Science Concepts in the Study of Misinformation: A Scoping Review.\",\"authors\":\"Carla Bang, Kelly Carroll, Niyati Mistry, Justin Presseau, Natasha Hudek, Sezgi Yanikomeroglu, Jamie C Brehaut\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/10901981241303871\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Misinformation hinders the impact of public health initiatives. Efforts to counter misinformation likely do not consider the full range of factors known to affect how individuals make decisions and act on them. Implementation science tools and concepts can facilitate the development of more effective interventions against health misinformation by leveraging advances in behavior specification, uptake of evidence, and theory-guided development and evaluation of complex interventions. We conducted a scoping review of misinformation literature reviews to document whether and how important concepts from implementation science have already informed the study of misinformation. Of 90 included reviews, the most frequently identified implementation science concepts were consideration of mechanisms driving misinformation (78%) and ways to intervene on, reduce, avoid, or circumvent it (71%). Other implementation science concepts were discussed much less frequently, such as tailoring strategies to the relevant context (9%) or public involvement in intervention development (9%). Less than half of reviews (47%) were guided by any theory, model, or framework. Among the 26 reviews that cited existing theories, most used theory narratively (62%) or only mentioned/cited the theory (19%), rather than using theory explicitly to interpret results (15%) or to inform data extraction (12%). Despite considerable research and many summaries of how to intervene against health misinformation, there has been relatively little consideration of many important advances in the science of health care implementation. This review identifies key areas from implementation science that might be useful to support future research into designing effective misinformation interventions.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12974,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Health Education & Behavior\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"10901981241303871\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Health Education & Behavior\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/10901981241303871\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health Education & Behavior","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10901981241303871","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

错误信息阻碍了公共卫生举措的影响。打击错误信息的努力可能没有考虑到影响个人如何做出决定和采取行动的所有已知因素。实施科学工具和概念可通过利用行为规范、获取证据以及理论指导的复杂干预措施的开发和评估方面的进展,促进制定更有效的干预措施,以应对卫生错误信息。我们对错误信息文献综述进行了范围审查,以记录实施科学的概念是否以及有多重要已经为错误信息的研究提供了信息。在90篇纳入的评论中,最常见的实施科学概念是考虑驱动错误信息的机制(78%)和干预、减少、避免或规避错误信息的方法(71%)。其他实施科学概念的讨论频率要低得多,例如根据相关情况量身定制策略(9%)或公众参与干预措施制定(9%)。不到一半的评论(47%)是由任何理论、模型或框架指导的。在引用现有理论的26篇综述中,大多数是叙述性地使用理论(62%)或只提到/引用理论(19%),而不是明确地使用理论来解释结果(15%)或为数据提取提供信息(12%)。尽管有大量的研究和许多关于如何干预健康错误信息的总结,但相对而言,很少有人考虑到卫生保健实施科学的许多重要进展。本综述确定了实施科学的关键领域,这些领域可能有助于支持未来设计有效的错误信息干预措施的研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Use of Implementation Science Concepts in the Study of Misinformation: A Scoping Review.

Misinformation hinders the impact of public health initiatives. Efforts to counter misinformation likely do not consider the full range of factors known to affect how individuals make decisions and act on them. Implementation science tools and concepts can facilitate the development of more effective interventions against health misinformation by leveraging advances in behavior specification, uptake of evidence, and theory-guided development and evaluation of complex interventions. We conducted a scoping review of misinformation literature reviews to document whether and how important concepts from implementation science have already informed the study of misinformation. Of 90 included reviews, the most frequently identified implementation science concepts were consideration of mechanisms driving misinformation (78%) and ways to intervene on, reduce, avoid, or circumvent it (71%). Other implementation science concepts were discussed much less frequently, such as tailoring strategies to the relevant context (9%) or public involvement in intervention development (9%). Less than half of reviews (47%) were guided by any theory, model, or framework. Among the 26 reviews that cited existing theories, most used theory narratively (62%) or only mentioned/cited the theory (19%), rather than using theory explicitly to interpret results (15%) or to inform data extraction (12%). Despite considerable research and many summaries of how to intervene against health misinformation, there has been relatively little consideration of many important advances in the science of health care implementation. This review identifies key areas from implementation science that might be useful to support future research into designing effective misinformation interventions.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Health Education & Behavior
Health Education & Behavior PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH-
CiteScore
8.60
自引率
2.40%
发文量
75
期刊介绍: Health Education & Behavior is the official publication of the Society for Public Health Education (SOPHE). The journal publishes authoritative and practical information on critical health issues for a broad range of professionals interested in understanding factors associated with health behavior and health status, and strategies to improve social and behavioral health. The journal is interested in articles directed toward researchers and/or practitioners in health behavior and health education. Empirical research, case study, program evaluation, literature reviews, and articles discussing theories are regularly published.
期刊最新文献
A Socio-Ecological Approach to Promoting Physical Activity in a Low-Income Neighborhood: A Randomized Controlled Pilot Trial. Primary Care Providers' Experiences With an Active Elective Genetic Testing Program. Rethink Recovery: A Qualitative Approach to Exploring Messaging for Medication-Assisted Recovery (MAR). Community Senior Center Intervention to Address Factors Related to Memory Screening Engagement. Concussion Awareness Training Tool for Youth: Impact on Concussion Knowledge, Beliefs, and Reporting Intentions.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1