Unreliable health information spread widely on social media during COVID-19, Concordia study finds

When the World Health Organization declared COVID-19 a global pandemic in March 2020, social media became one of the public’s main sources of health information. People shared news, advice and personal experiences to navigate an unfolding crisis.

But a Concordia study suggests that much of the health information circulating on social media during that critical early period lacked basic indicators of quality, reliability and transparency.

The study, "Quality Assessment of Health Information on Social Media During a Public Health Crisis: Infodemiology Study" was published in JMIR Infodemiology. It was co-authored by Mohsen Farhadloo, associate professor and Concordia University Research Chair in Business Analytics for Public Health and Public Policy, and Rozita Haghighi, a master’s student at the John Molson School of Business.

Focusing on what people shared the most

The research team collected approximately 28.4 million English-language tweets posted in March 2020. From that dataset, they identified the 100 websites containing COVID-19 health information that were retweeted most frequently.

Those websites were evaluated using two established assessment tools. The first was the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) benchmarks, which measure transparency based on four criteria: authorship, attribution, disclosure and currency. The second was the DISCERN instrument, which assesses the reliability and quality of health information, particularly treatment-related content, on a scale from 16 to 80 points.

Websites were also categorized by affiliation, including news organizations, government agencies, medical centres, universities, non-profits and commercial sites, as well as by content type such as medical facts or human-interest stories.

Transparency gaps

The results revealed significant shortcomings.

None of the 100 websites met all four JAMA transparency criteria, and 95 per cent satisfied two or fewer. Most failed to clearly identify authorship or disclose potential conflicts of interest. Ninety-four per cent did not meet the authorship criterion, while 96 per cent failed to meet disclosure standards.

Unexpectedly, government and medical centre websites scored lower on transparency than news organizations. Government sites posted the lowest average JAMA score, while news websites performed comparatively better, though still far from ideal.

Overall quality remained low

The DISCERN assessment showed equally concerning results. More than 80 per cent of the websites scored in the lowest quality range. Only eight per cent reached moderate quality, and just 11 per cent were classified as high quality. The average score across all sites was 32.75 out of a possible 80.

Medical centre websites performed poorly in areas related to treatment information, including explaining how treatments work, outlining risks and benefits, discussing the consequences of not pursuing treatment and supporting user decision-making.

Government websites struggled to provide balanced, unbiased information or adequately address uncertainty, a key issue during a rapidly evolving health crisis.

Popular did not mean reliable

Two-thirds of the most frequently shared websites focused on human interest stories. These tended to score particularly low on quality measures. Only 30 per cent of sites provided medical facts, and even among those, half still received low-quality scores.

News and commercial websites, despite their popularity on social media, consistently offered less reliable and less comprehensive COVID-19 health information overall.

Lessons

The findings highlight vulnerabilities in how health information is produced, shared and consumed on social media which can have serious consequences during public health emergencies.

The researchers recommend that medical centres, government agencies and universities ensure their online health content is clearly authored, properly sourced and regularly updated. News and commercial platforms should strengthen editorial standards and involve fact-checkers and medical experts in reviewing health-related content.

Public education also plays a critical role. Teaching users to look for basic indicators of quality like authorship, attribution, disclosure and currency can help people better assess the information they encounter online.

As social media continues to shape how health information circulates during emergencies, the study underscores the importance of transparency, accuracy and accountability to support informed decision-making and maintain public trust when it matters most.

Read the cited article, "Quality Assessment of Health Information on Social Media During a Public Health Crisis: Infodemiology Study."