Social histories of public health misinformation and infodemics: case studies of four pandemics.

Recognition of misinformation as a public health threat and interest in infodemics, defined as an inundation of information accompanying an epidemic or acute health event, have increased worldwide. However, scientists have no consensus on how to best define and identify misinformation and other essential characteristics of infodemics. We conducted a narrative review of secondary historical sources to examine previous infodemics in relation to four infectious diseases associated with pandemics (ie, smallpox, cholera, 1918 influenza, and HIV) and challenge the assumption that misinformation is a new phenomenon associated with increased use of social media or with the COVID-19 pandemic. On the contrary, we found that the spread of health misinformation has always been a public health challenge that has necessitated innovative solutions from medical and public health communities. We suggest expanding beyond the narrow scope of addressing misinformation to manage information ecosystems, defined as how people consume, produce, interact with, and behave around information, which include factors such as trust, stigma, and scientific literacy. Although misinformation can spread on a global scale, this holistic approach advocates for community-level interventions that improve relationships and trust between medical or public health entities and local populations.

Beyond misinformation: developing a public health prevention framework for managing information ecosystems.

The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted how infodemics (defined as an overabundance of information, including misinformation and disinformation) pose a threat to public health and could hinder individuals from making informed health decisions. Although public health authorities and other stakeholders have implemented measures for managing infodemics, existing frameworks for infodemic management have been primarily focused on responding to acute health emergencies rather than integrated in routine service delivery. We review the evidence and propose a framework for infodemic management that encompasses upstream strategies and provides guidance on identifying different interventions, informed by the four levels of prevention in public health: primary, secondary, tertiary, and primordial prevention. On the basis of a narrative review of 54 documents (peer-reviewed and grey literature published from 1961 to 2023), we present examples of interventions that belong to each level of prevention. Adopting this framework requires proactive prevention and response through managing information ecosystems, beyond reacting to misinformation or disinformation.

Measuring the Burden of Infodemics: Summary of the Methods and Results of the Fifth WHO Infodemic Management Conference.

Background: An infodemic is excess information, including false or misleading information, that spreads in digital and physical environments during a public health emergency. The COVID-19 pandemic has been accompanied by an unprecedented global infodemic that has led to confusion about the benefits of medical and public health interventions, with substantial impact on risk-taking and health-seeking behaviors, eroding trust in health authorities and compromising the effectiveness of public health responses and policies. Standardized measures are needed to quantify the harmful impacts of the infodemic in a systematic and methodologically robust manner, as well as harmonizing highly divergent approaches currently explored for this purpose. This can serve as a foundation for a systematic, evidence-based approach to monitoring, identifying, and mitigating future infodemic harms in emergency preparedness and prevention. Objective: In this paper, we summarize the Fifth World Health Organization (WHO) Infodemic Management Conference structure, proceedings, outcomes, and proposed actions seeking to identify the interdisciplinary approaches and frameworks needed to enable the measurement of the burden of infodemics. Methods: An iterative human-centered design (HCD) approach and concept mapping were used to facilitate focused discussions and allow for the generation of actionable outcomes and recommendations. The discussions included 86 participants representing diverse scientific disciplines and health authorities from 28 countries across all WHO regions, along with observers from civil society and global public health-implementing partners. A thematic map capturing the concepts matching the key contributing factors to the public health burden of infodemics was used throughout the conference to frame and contextualize discussions. Five key areas for immediate action were identified. Results: The 5 key areas for the development of metrics to assess the burden of infodemics and associated interventions included (1) developing standardized definitions and ensuring the adoption thereof; (2) improving the map of concepts influencing the burden of infodemics; (3) conducting a review of evidence, tools, and data sources; (4) setting up a technical working group; and (5) addressing immediate priorities for postpandemic recovery and resilience building. The summary report consolidated group input toward a common vocabulary with standardized terms, concepts, study designs, measures, and tools to estimate the burden of infodemics and the effectiveness of infodemic management interventions. Conclusions: Standardizing measurement is the basis for documenting the burden of infodemics on health systems and population health during emergencies. Investment is needed into the development of practical, affordable, evidence-based, and systematic methods that are legally and ethically balanced for monitoring infodemics; generating diagnostics, infodemic insights, and recommendations; and developing interventions, action-oriented guidance, policies, support options, mechanisms, and tools for infodemic managers and emergency program managers.

The Future of Infodemic Surveillance as Public Health Surveillance.

Public health systems need to be able to detect and respond to infodemics (outbreaks of misinformation, disinformation, information overload, or information voids). Drawing from our experience at the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the COVID-19 State of Vaccine Confidence Insight Reporting System has been created as one of the first public health infodemic surveillance systems. Key functions of infodemic surveillance systems include monitoring the information environment by person, place, and time; identifying infodemic events with digital analytics; conducting offline community-based assessments; and generating timely routine reports. Although specific considerations of several system attributes of infodemic surveillance system must be considered, infodemic surveillance systems share several similarities with traditional public health surveillance systems. Because both information and pathogens are spread more readily in an increasingly hyperconnected world, sustainable and routine systems must be created to ensure that timely interventions can be deployed for both epidemic and infodemic response.

Period Prevalence of Rheumatic Heart Disease and the Need for a Centralized Patient Registry in American Samoa, 2016 to 2018.

Background Rheumatic heart disease (RHD) is a severe, chronic complication of acute rheumatic fever, triggered by group A streptococcal pharyngitis. Centralized patient registries are recommended for RHD prevention and control, but none exists in American Samoa. Using existing RHD tracking systems, we estimated RHD period prevalence and the proportion of people with RHD documented in the electronic health record. Methods and Results RHD cases were identified from a centralized electronic health record system, which retrieved clinical encounters with RHD International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-10-CM) codes, clinical problem lists referencing RHD, and antibiotic prophylaxis administration records; 3 RHD patient tracking spreadsheets; and an all-cause mortality database. RHD cases had ≥1 clinical encounter with RHD ICD-10-CM codes, a diagnostic echocardiogram, or RHD as a cause of death, or were included in RHD patient tracking spreadsheets. Period prevalence per 1000 population among children aged <18 years and adults aged ≥18 years from 2016 to 2018 and the proportion of people with RHD with ≥1 clinical encounter with an RHD ICD-10-CM code were estimated. From 2016 to 2018, RHD was documented in 327 people (57.2%: children aged <18 years). Overall RHD period prevalence was 6.3 cases per 1000 and varied by age (10.0 pediatric cases and 4.3 adult cases per 1000). Only 67% of people with RHD had ≥1 clinical encounter with an RHD ICD-10-CM code. Conclusions RHD remains a serious public health problem in American Samoa, and the existing electronic health record does not include all cases. A centralized patient registry could improve tracking people with RHD to ensure they receive necessary care.

Severe Gastrointestinal Involvement in Pediatric Stevens-Johnson Syndrome: A Case Report and Review of the Literature.

Stevens-Johnson syndrome and toxic epidermal necrolysis form a rare but severe disease spectrum characterized by widespread epidermal detachment. Gastrointestinal manifestations of the disease, however, are rarely described in the pediatric literature and have a high mortality among adults. There are limited data on the treatment of these cases, with conflicting evidence regarding the benefit of steroids, IVIG, or other immunosuppressive agents. We review previous instances of gastrointestinal involvement in children and report the case of a previously healthy 13-year-old who presented with the typical ocular and skin findings of Stevens-Johnson syndrome, subsequently developed severe life-threatening diarrhea, and was found to have severe esophagitis, duodenitis, and colitis on endoscopic evaluation. Treatment was initiated with an immediate, short course of steroids along with early introduction of an enteral diet via nasogastric tube, and resulted in full gastrointestinal recovery. This case highlights successful medical treatment of the first reported pediatric case of SJS/TEN with both upper and lower gastrointestinal tract involvement.

Enhanced contact investigations for nine early travel-related cases of SARS-CoV-2 in the United States.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), the respiratory disease caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), was first identified in Wuhan, China and has since become pandemic. In response to the first cases identified in the United States, close contacts of confirmed COVID-19 cases were investigated to enable early identification and isolation of additional cases and to learn more about risk factors for transmission. Close contacts of nine early travel-related cases in the United States were identified and monitored daily for development of symptoms (active monitoring). Selected close contacts (including those with exposures categorized as higher risk) were targeted for collection of additional exposure information and respiratory samples. Respiratory samples were tested for SARS-CoV-2 by real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Four hundred four close contacts were actively monitored in the jurisdictions that managed the travel-related cases. Three hundred thirty-eight of the 404 close contacts provided at least basic exposure information, of whom 159 close contacts had ≥1 set of respiratory samples collected and tested. Across all actively monitored close contacts, two additional symptomatic COVID-19 cases (i.e., secondary cases) were identified; both secondary cases were in spouses of travel-associated case patients. When considering only household members, all of whom had ≥1 respiratory sample tested for SARS-CoV-2, the secondary attack rate (i.e., the number of secondary cases as a proportion of total close contacts) was 13% (95% CI: 4-38%). The results from these contact tracing investigations suggest that household members, especially significant others, of COVID-19 cases are at highest risk of becoming infected. The importance of personal protective equipment for healthcare workers is also underlined. Isolation of persons with COVID-19, in combination with quarantine of exposed close contacts and practice of everyday preventive behaviors, is important to mitigate spread of COVID-19.

Detecting organisational innovations leading to improved ICU outcomes: a protocol for a double-blinded national positive deviance study of critical care delivery.

INTRODUCTION: There is substantial variability in intensive care unit (ICU) utilisation and quality of care. However, the factors that drive this variation are poorly understood. This study uses a novel adaptation of positive deviance approach-a methodology used in public health that assumes solutions to challenges already exist within the system to detect innovations that are likely to improve intensive care. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We used the Philips eICU Research Institute database, containing 3.3 million patient records from over 50 health systems across the USA. Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation IVa scores were used to identify the study cohort, which included ICU patients whose outcomes were felt to be most sensitive to organisational innovations. The primary outcomes included mortality and length of stay. Outcome measurements were directly standardised, and bootstrapped CIs were calculated with adjustment for false discovery rate. Using purposive sampling, we then generated a blinded list of five positive outliers and five negative comparators.Using rapid qualitative inquiry (RQI), blinded interdisciplinary site visit teams will conduct interviews and observations using a team ethnography approach. After data collection is completed, the data will be unblinded and analysed using a cross-case method to identify themes, patterns and innovations using a constant comparative grounded theory approach. This process detects the innovations in intensive care and supports an evaluation of how positive deviance and RQI methods can be adapted to healthcare. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study protocol was approved by the Stanford University Institutional Review Board (reference: 39509). We plan on publishing study findings and methodological guidance in peer-reviewed academic journals, white papers and presentations at conferences.