e.g. mhealth
Search Results (1 to 10 of 250 Results)
Download search results: CSV END BibTex RIS
Skip search results from other journals and go to results- 97 Journal of Medical Internet Research
- 51 JMIR Infodemiology
- 41 JMIR Formative Research
- 20 JMIR Public Health and Surveillance
- 11 JMIR Dermatology
- 9 JMIR Research Protocols
- 7 JMIRx Med
- 4 JMIR Cancer
- 4 JMIR Human Factors
- 2 JMIR Pediatrics and Parenting
- 1 JMIR AI
- 1 JMIR Aging
- 1 JMIR Medical Education
- 1 JMIR Serious Games
- 0 Medicine 2.0
- 0 Interactive Journal of Medical Research
- 0 iProceedings
- 0 JMIR Medical Informatics
- 0 JMIR mHealth and uHealth
- 0 JMIR Mental Health
- 0 JMIR Rehabilitation and Assistive Technologies
- 0 JMIR Preprints
- 0 JMIR Bioinformatics and Biotechnology
- 0 JMIR Challenges
- 0 JMIR Diabetes
- 0 JMIR Biomedical Engineering
- 0 JMIR Data
- 0 JMIR Cardio
- 0 Journal of Participatory Medicine
- 0 JMIR Perioperative Medicine
- 0 JMIR Nursing
- 0 JMIRx Bio
- 0 Transfer Hub (manuscript eXchange)
- 0 JMIR Neurotechnology
- 0 Asian/Pacific Island Nursing Journal
- 0 Online Journal of Public Health Informatics
- 0 JMIR XR and Spatial Computing (JMXR)
It was shown that town-level fragmentation of these networks is associated with the spread of misinformation about COVID-19 and the share of fake statements encountered by respondents. The results remain robust after controlling for individual characteristics, including the use of online and traditional media, fear of COVID-19, and household experience with the disease. This study contributes to the growing literature on the spread of health misinformation on social media [23].
JMIR Infodemiology 2025;5:e58302
Download Citation: END BibTex RIS
Disinformation differs from misinformation and is defined as false information accidentally disseminated, without malicious intent [4]. This is different from misinformation that implies a deceptive aim. These falsehoods can take various forms, such as promoting untested remedies or treatments, voicing inaccurate health claims, and propagating conspiracy theories about illnesses, climate change, and vaccines [6].
J Med Internet Res 2025;27:e64225
Download Citation: END BibTex RIS
Although studies have been emerging since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic that have addressed misinformation sources, channels, and messages [28-31], in general, less attention has been paid to the exhaustive characterization of the profiles of people who embrace misinformation and particularly understanding which messages have penetrated the audiences.
JMIR Infodemiology 2025;5:e69945
Download Citation: END BibTex RIS
The risks of misinformation are amplified by three key factors: the dominance of marketing-oriented narratives (56/85, 65.9%), the paucity of balanced dialogues addressing product safety versus potential harm, and the lack of ingredient transparency. Based on our content analysis, most videos did not explicitly disclose specific ingredients in the breast enhancement products they promoted.
J Med Internet Res 2025;27:e73336
Download Citation: END BibTex RIS
Go back to the top of the page Skip and go to footer section
Another study examined dementia-related stigma on social media during the COVID-19 pandemic and identified issues of misinformation, ageism, and dementia being used as an insult for political ridicule [6]. However, no existing studies have examined the impact of global awareness campaigns on dementia-related stigma.
This study examines dementia-related stigma on X during World Alzheimer’s Month, a global advocacy campaign organized by Alzheimer’s Disease International [18].
JMIR Form Res 2025;9:e72775
Download Citation: END BibTex RIS
The Quality of Dermatology Match Information on Social Media Platforms: Cross-Sectional Analysis
Program director surveys could help clarify common misconceptions, and efforts to correct misinformation through trusted sources may improve the accuracy of information available to applicants. Applicants seeking reliable guidance should turn to established mentorship programs, such as the National Mentorship Match through the Dermatology Interest Group Association, and official recommendations from the APD.
JMIR Dermatol 2025;8:e65217
Download Citation: END BibTex RIS
Indeed, prior work suggests antivaccine sentiment generates more engagement than provaccine sentiment [20] and that exposure to misinformation can decrease intent to vaccinate [12,21,22]. However, there are still relatively few papers that use panel data to investigate the relationship between social media use and vaccine preferences, and our understanding of this relationship is still limited.
JMIR Infodemiology 2025;5:e66081
Download Citation: END BibTex RIS
However, the surge in these informational needs overlapped with the rapid spread of misinformation and false news through social media platforms, leading to widespread public confusion.
The WHO used the term “infodemic” to describe the spread of misinformation during the pandemic [1]. They emphasized the potential threat that such misinformation posed to national epidemic prevention policies.
J Med Internet Res 2025;27:e73601
Download Citation: END BibTex RIS
In the HPV antivaccine network, the main traits of social media misinformation messages included mentioning #Gardasil, claiming to reveal a lie, conspiracy theories, and risk of vaccine injury [22].
Previous research has documented the amount of misinformation about the HPV vaccine on social media, the most prevalent misinformation, and it has documented the ways that vaccine misinformation impacts vaccination attitudes and behavior.
J Med Internet Res 2025;27:e54657
Download Citation: END BibTex RIS