Maintenance Notice

Due to necessary scheduled maintenance, the JMIR Publications website will be unavailable from Wednesday, July 01, 2020 at 8:00 PM to 10:00 PM EST. We apologize in advance for any inconvenience this may cause you.

Who will be affected?

Accepted for/Published in: Journal of Medical Internet Research

Date Submitted: Jul 23, 2024
Open Peer Review Period: Jul 23, 2024 - Sep 17, 2024
Date Accepted: Dec 19, 2024
(closed for review but you can still tweet)

The final, peer-reviewed published version of this preprint can be found here:

Quantifying Public Engagement With Science and Malinformation on COVID-19 Vaccines: Cross-Sectional Study

Grimes DR, Gorski DH

Quantifying Public Engagement With Science and Malinformation on COVID-19 Vaccines: Cross-Sectional Study

J Med Internet Res 2025;27:e64679

DOI: 10.2196/64679

PMID: 40116851

PMCID: 11971574

Quantifying public engagement with science and malinformation on COVID-19 vaccines: Cross-Sectional study

  • David Robert Grimes; 
  • David H Gorski

ABSTRACT

Background:

Medical journals are critical vanguards of research, and there is increased public interest in and engagement with medico-scientific findings. How findings propagate and are understood, and what harms erroneous claims might cause to public health remain unclear.

Objective:

To gauge the engagement of the public with medical science and quantify the propagation patterns of medico-scientific articles.

Methods:

Altmetric analysis of engagement with a decade of approximately 9.8 million articles from five leading medical journals. Comparative analysis with the proliferation of and sentiment of the article with the highest-ever Altmetric score, containing vaccine-negative malinformation in social media users and media outlets worldwide.

Results:

Potential scientific malinformation was much more likely to be engaged with and amplified by vaccine-negative twitter accounts than neutral ones (p < 0.00001), with negative editorialization alluding to the ostensible prestige of medical journals. Malinformation was invoked frequently invoked by conspiracy theory websites and non-news sources (39.2% of all citations) online to cast doubt on the efficacy of vaccination, who tended to use that information repeatedly.

Conclusions:

Our findings suggest growing public interest in medical science and presents evidence that medical and scientific journals need be aware of the harms of potential misinformation and malinformation. Clinical Trial: NA


 Citation

Please cite as:

Grimes DR, Gorski DH

Quantifying Public Engagement With Science and Malinformation on COVID-19 Vaccines: Cross-Sectional Study

J Med Internet Res 2025;27:e64679

DOI: 10.2196/64679

PMID: 40116851

PMCID: 11971574

Download PDF


Request queued. Please wait while the file is being generated. It may take some time.

© The authors. All rights reserved. This is a privileged document currently under peer-review/community review (or an accepted/rejected manuscript). Authors have provided JMIR Publications with an exclusive license to publish this preprint on it's website for review and ahead-of-print citation purposes only. While the final peer-reviewed paper may be licensed under a cc-by license on publication, at this stage authors and publisher expressively prohibit redistribution of this draft paper other than for review purposes.