A systematic literature review of individual-level psychological and behavioral responses to the health information of COVID-19 from social media and legacy media
This article has been Reviewed by the following groups
Discuss this preprint
Start a discussion What are Sciety discussions?Listed in
- Evaluated articles (ScreenIT)
Abstract
Covid-19 has been recognized as a terrifying global health threat since its detection, with far-reaching consequences that are unprecedented in the modern era. Since the outbreak of the pandemic, social media and legacy media have collectively delivered health information related to COVID-19 to the public as a catalyst to community perception of risk. However, the existing literature exhibits different viewpoints toward the role of social media and legacy media in disseminating health information of COVID-19. In this regard, this article conducted a systematic literature review to provide an overview of the current state of research concerning individuals-level psychological and behavioral response to COVID-19 related information from different sources, as well as presents the challenges and future research directions.
Article activity feed
-
SciScore for 10.1101/2021.12.14.21267757: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
Ethics not detected. Sex as a biological variable not detected. Randomization not detected. Blinding not detected. Power Analysis not detected. Table 2: Resources
Software and Algorithms Sentences Resources The first strategy is to identify all English-language studies that were published since 2020 from Web of Science and Google Scholar databases. Google Scholarsuggested: (Google Scholar, RRID:SCR_008878)Results from OddPub: We did not detect open data. We also did not detect open code. Researchers are encouraged to share open data when possible (see Nature blog).
Results from LimitationRecognizer: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage …SciScore for 10.1101/2021.12.14.21267757: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
Ethics not detected. Sex as a biological variable not detected. Randomization not detected. Blinding not detected. Power Analysis not detected. Table 2: Resources
Software and Algorithms Sentences Resources The first strategy is to identify all English-language studies that were published since 2020 from Web of Science and Google Scholar databases. Google Scholarsuggested: (Google Scholar, RRID:SCR_008878)Results from OddPub: We did not detect open data. We also did not detect open code. Researchers are encouraged to share open data when possible (see Nature blog).
Results from LimitationRecognizer: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.Results from TrialIdentifier: No clinical trial numbers were referenced.
Results from Barzooka: We did not find any issues relating to the usage of bar graphs.
Results from JetFighter: We did not find any issues relating to colormaps.
Results from rtransparent:- Thank you for including a conflict of interest statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
- Thank you for including a funding statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
- No protocol registration statement was detected.
Results from scite Reference Check: We found no unreliable references.
-
