Internet Memes as Drivers of Health Narratives and Infodemics: Integrative Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Digital media memes have emerged as influential tools in health communication, particularly during the COVID-19 pandemic. While they offer opportunities for emotional engagement and community resilience, they also act as vectors for health misinformation, contributing to the global infodemic. Despite growing interest in their communicative power, the role of memes in shaping public perception and misinformation diffusion remains underexplored in infodemiology. Objective: This integrative review aims to analyze how memes influence emotional, behavioral, and ideological responses to health crises, and to examine their dual role as both contributors to and potential mitigators of infodemics. The paper also explores strategies for integrating memes into public health campaigns and infodemic management. Methods: A comprehensive literature search was conducted across 3 major databases (MEDLINE, Scopus, and Web of Science), identifying a total of 386 records. Following duplicate removal and eligibility screening, 14 peer-reviewed studies published between 2020 and 2025 were included. An integrative narrative approach was used to synthesize evidence on social media behavior, misinformation dynamics, and digital health campaigns. The analysis was grounded in infodemiological and infoveillance frameworks as established by Eysenbach, incorporating insights from psychology, media studies, and public health. Results: Memes function as emotionally salient and visually potent carriers of health-related narratives. While they can simplify complex messages and foster adaptive humor during crises, they are also susceptible to distortion, particularly in echo chambers and conspiracy communities. Findings reveal that misinformation-laden memes often leverage humor and disgust to bypass critical thinking, and their viral potential is linked to emotional intensity. However, memes have also been successfully integrated into prebunking strategies, increasing engagement and reducing susceptibility to false claims when culturally tailored. The review identifies key mechanisms that enhance or hinder the infodemiological value of memes, including political orientation, digital literacy, and narrative framing. Conclusions: Memes are a double-edged sword in the context of infodemics. Their integration into infodemic surveillance and digital health campaigns requires a nuanced understanding of their emotional, cultural, and epistemic effects. Public health institutions should incorporate meme analysis into real-time infoveillance systems, apply evidence-based meme formats in prebunking efforts, and foster digital literacy that enables critical meme consumption. Future infodemiology research should further explore the long-term behavioral impacts of memetic misinformation and the scalability of meme-based interventions.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.035 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.014 | 0.013 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".