Conflicting health information: a critical research need

Delesha M. Carpenter; Lorie L. Geryk; Annie T. Chen; Rebekah H. Nagler; Nathan F. Dieckmann; Paul K.J. Han

doi:10.1111/hex.12438

Conflicting health information: a critical research need

Delesha M. Carpenter, Lorie L. Geryk, Annie T. Chen, Rebekah H. Nagler, Nathan F. Dieckmann, Paul K.J. Han

Hubbard School of Journalism and Mass Communication

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

84 Scopus citations

Abstract

Conflicting health information is increasing in amount and visibility, as evidenced most recently by the controversy surrounding the risks and benefits of childhood vaccinations. The mechanisms through which conflicting information affects individuals are poorly understood; thus, we are unprepared to help people process conflicting information when making important health decisions. In this viewpoint article, we describe this problem, summarize insights from the existing literature on the prevalence and effects of conflicting health information, and identify important knowledge gaps. We propose a working definition of conflicting health information and describe a conceptual typology to guide future research in this area. The typology classifies conflicting information according to four fundamental dimensions: the substantive issue under conflict, the number of conflicting sources (multiplicity), the degree of evidence heterogeneity and the degree of temporal inconsistency.

Original language	English (US)
Pages (from-to)	1173-1182
Number of pages	10
Journal	Health Expectations
Volume	19
Issue number	6
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1111/hex.12438
State	Published - Dec 1 2016

Bibliographical note

Funding Information:
DMC's salary was partially supported by the National Center for Research Resources and the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences, National Institutes of Health, through Grant KL2TR000084. RHN acknowledges support from the Building Interdisciplinary Research Careers in Women's Health Grant (2K12-HD055887) from the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institutes of Child Health and Human Development, the Office of Research on Women's Health and the National Institute on Aging, administered by the University of Minnesota Deborah E. Powell Center for Women's Health. NFD acknowledges the generous support of the U. S. National Science Foundation (Award#1231231 administered by Decision Research). PKJH acknowledges the support of the National Human Genome Research Institute under the Intergovernmental Personnel Act. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences, National Science Foundation or the National Institutes of Health.

Publisher Copyright:
© 2015 The Authors. Health Expectations Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Keywords

conflicting information
decision-making
health

UN SDGs

This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

Publisher link

10.1111/hex.12438

Find It

Find It at U of M Libraries

Cite this

@article{c9ce438e3b74411eabbe1587e5a296d9,

title = "Conflicting health information: a critical research need",

abstract = "Conflicting health information is increasing in amount and visibility, as evidenced most recently by the controversy surrounding the risks and benefits of childhood vaccinations. The mechanisms through which conflicting information affects individuals are poorly understood; thus, we are unprepared to help people process conflicting information when making important health decisions. In this viewpoint article, we describe this problem, summarize insights from the existing literature on the prevalence and effects of conflicting health information, and identify important knowledge gaps. We propose a working definition of conflicting health information and describe a conceptual typology to guide future research in this area. The typology classifies conflicting information according to four fundamental dimensions: the substantive issue under conflict, the number of conflicting sources (multiplicity), the degree of evidence heterogeneity and the degree of temporal inconsistency.",

keywords = "conflicting information, decision-making, health",

author = "Carpenter, {Delesha M.} and Geryk, {Lorie L.} and Chen, {Annie T.} and Nagler, {Rebekah H.} and Dieckmann, {Nathan F.} and Han, {Paul K.J.}",

note = "Funding Information: DMC's salary was partially supported by the National Center for Research Resources and the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences, National Institutes of Health, through Grant KL2TR000084. RHN acknowledges support from the Building Interdisciplinary Research Careers in Women's Health Grant (2K12-HD055887) from the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institutes of Child Health and Human Development, the Office of Research on Women's Health and the National Institute on Aging, administered by the University of Minnesota Deborah E. Powell Center for Women's Health. NFD acknowledges the generous support of the U. S. National Science Foundation (Award#1231231 administered by Decision Research). PKJH acknowledges the support of the National Human Genome Research Institute under the Intergovernmental Personnel Act. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences, National Science Foundation or the National Institutes of Health. Publisher Copyright: {\textcopyright} 2015 The Authors. Health Expectations Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.",

year = "2016",

month = dec,

day = "1",

doi = "10.1111/hex.12438",

language = "English (US)",

volume = "19",

pages = "1173--1182",

journal = "Health Expectations",

issn = "1369-6513",

publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",

number = "6",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Conflicting health information

T2 - a critical research need

AU - Carpenter, Delesha M.

AU - Geryk, Lorie L.

AU - Chen, Annie T.

AU - Nagler, Rebekah H.

AU - Dieckmann, Nathan F.

AU - Han, Paul K.J.

N1 - Funding Information: DMC's salary was partially supported by the National Center for Research Resources and the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences, National Institutes of Health, through Grant KL2TR000084. RHN acknowledges support from the Building Interdisciplinary Research Careers in Women's Health Grant (2K12-HD055887) from the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institutes of Child Health and Human Development, the Office of Research on Women's Health and the National Institute on Aging, administered by the University of Minnesota Deborah E. Powell Center for Women's Health. NFD acknowledges the generous support of the U. S. National Science Foundation (Award#1231231 administered by Decision Research). PKJH acknowledges the support of the National Human Genome Research Institute under the Intergovernmental Personnel Act. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences, National Science Foundation or the National Institutes of Health. Publisher Copyright: © 2015 The Authors. Health Expectations Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

PY - 2016/12/1

Y1 - 2016/12/1

N2 - Conflicting health information is increasing in amount and visibility, as evidenced most recently by the controversy surrounding the risks and benefits of childhood vaccinations. The mechanisms through which conflicting information affects individuals are poorly understood; thus, we are unprepared to help people process conflicting information when making important health decisions. In this viewpoint article, we describe this problem, summarize insights from the existing literature on the prevalence and effects of conflicting health information, and identify important knowledge gaps. We propose a working definition of conflicting health information and describe a conceptual typology to guide future research in this area. The typology classifies conflicting information according to four fundamental dimensions: the substantive issue under conflict, the number of conflicting sources (multiplicity), the degree of evidence heterogeneity and the degree of temporal inconsistency.

AB - Conflicting health information is increasing in amount and visibility, as evidenced most recently by the controversy surrounding the risks and benefits of childhood vaccinations. The mechanisms through which conflicting information affects individuals are poorly understood; thus, we are unprepared to help people process conflicting information when making important health decisions. In this viewpoint article, we describe this problem, summarize insights from the existing literature on the prevalence and effects of conflicting health information, and identify important knowledge gaps. We propose a working definition of conflicting health information and describe a conceptual typology to guide future research in this area. The typology classifies conflicting information according to four fundamental dimensions: the substantive issue under conflict, the number of conflicting sources (multiplicity), the degree of evidence heterogeneity and the degree of temporal inconsistency.

KW - conflicting information

KW - decision-making

KW - health

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84952836597&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84952836597&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1111/hex.12438

DO - 10.1111/hex.12438

M3 - Article

C2 - 26709206

AN - SCOPUS:84952836597

SN - 1369-6513

VL - 19

SP - 1173

EP - 1182

JO - Health Expectations

JF - Health Expectations

IS - 6

ER -

Conflicting health information: a critical research need

Abstract

Bibliographical note

Keywords

UN SDGs

Publisher link

Find It

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this