JMIR Publications

ABSTRACT

Background:

The Internet and social media have become essential sources of health information for patients and citizens; however, they often disseminate misinformation that lacks scientific evidence. Health-related misinformation can undermine evidence-based treatment, weaken patient-provider relationships, and contribute to adverse health outcomes. Although narratives have been proposed as a promising approach to countering misinformation, their effectiveness remains inconsistent and influenced by various factors.

Objective:

To assess the effectiveness of narrative messages in correcting health-related misinformation compared to non-narrative messages. It also seeks to identify message-, sender-, and recipient-related factors that influence the effectiveness of narrative-based corrections.

Methods:

This systematic review will follow the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Comprehensive searches will be conducted across databases, including PubMed, MEDLINE, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, PsycINFO, and Web of Science, using keywords related to narratives and correction of health-related misinformation. The review will include quantitative studies evaluating narrative-based corrections for health-related misinformation, in experimental and quasi-experimental studies. Studies unrelated to health misinformation or where the full text is unavailable will be excluded. No restrictions on publication year will apply. Only papers written in English will be included. Two independent reviewers will screen the papers using Rayyan QCRI software, with disagreements resolved by a third reviewer. Data extraction will cover health topics (e.g., vaccination and tobacco), study characteristics (e.g., author and publication year), characteristics of the narrative (e.g., definition of narrative and theoretical foundation), characteristics of participants (e.g., sociodemographic), methodology (e.g., study design, content of interventions and comparators, outcomes and measures, and moderating and mediating factors), main results, and discussion. The quality of the eligible studies will be assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 tool.

Results:

The results will be summarized in tables and presented as a descriptive review addressing the effectiveness of narrative corrections on health-related misinformation and the factors influencing their success. The implications of these results for future studies and practices will be elucidated. The findings of this review will be presented at a relevant conference and submitted to a peer-reviewed journal for publication. The aim is to complete the submission process by the northern summer of 2025.

Conclusions:

Narrative messages represent a theoretically promising strategy for countering health-related misinformation; however, their effectiveness is context-dependent. This review will offer critical insights into the factors that influence the success of narrative corrections for health-related misinformation, contributing to the development of improved correction strategies and a theoretical understanding of narrative corrections.