MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4200451938 · doi:10.1080/17538068.2021.2012005

Infodemic, social contagion and the public health response to COVID-19: insights and lessons from Nigeria

2021· article· en· W4200451938 on OpenAlexaff
Bridget O. Alichie, Ediomo‐Ubong E. Nelson, Blessing Nonye Onyima

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Communications In Healthcare · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMisinformation and Its Impacts
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPublic healthSocial mediaPandemicGlobeOutbreakHealth communicationGlobal healthMedicineDiseasePublic relationsEnvironmental healthPolitical scienceCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Infectious disease (medical specialty)VirologyNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background The expansion of the internet and social media platforms have spurred an online infodemic, which has surged towards alarming proportions across the globe. The online infodemic trend has been particularly felt in Nigeria in the area of health information and communication throughout the recurring public health emergencies of the current decade. The outbreak of the ongoing COVID-19 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic in March 2020 reaffirms the biggest threat of infodemic across online platforms against containment efforts and responses in Nigeria.Methods This study reflects on infodemic trends related to COVID-19 in light of previous zoonotic viral diseases in Nigeria (e.g. Ebola, Lassa, and Monkeypox). Relevant published research and gray literature on zoonotic diseases and communication responses are reviewed.Results Drawing lessons and insights from previous zoonotic viral diseases in Nigeria, we show the extent to which online infodemic hampers public health responses to the COVID-19 pandemic. The theory of social contagion, which describes the fear and panic that emerge during disease outbreaks, is deployed to deepen understanding of how online infodemic pose threats during health emergencies.Conclusion We argue that Nigeria and other countries affected by disease outbreaks would thrive better by proactive inclusion and management of online communication channels in addition to coordinated clinical (prophylactic or therapeutic) models.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0040.005
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.189
GPT teacher head0.480
Teacher spread0.291 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Communications In HealthcareSame topicMisinformation and Its ImpactsFrench-language works237,207