Ge Pu
1 
, Liu Jin
2 , Han Xiao
3, Wei Shu-ting
4, He Xi-zhe
5, Tang Ying
6, Xu Xin
7, Wang Sheng-yuan
8, Bian Ying
1* , Wu Yibo
9,10* 1 Institute of Chinese Medical Sciences & State Key Laboratory of Quality Research in Chinese Medicine, University of Macau, Avenida da Universidade, Taipa, Macau 999078, China
2 The Third Clinical Department, China Medical University,Shenyang 110013,Liaoning Province,China
3 School of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou 510006, Guangdong Province, China
4 Cheeloo College of Medicine,ShanDong University,Jinan 250012,Shandong Province,China
5 Jiangxi University of Traditional Chinese Medicine,Nanchang 330004,Jiangxi Province,China
6 Changzhi Medical College,Changzhi 046000,Shanxi Province,China
7 School of Life Science, Peking University, Beijing 100871,China
8 Liaoning Technical University College of the Media and Arts, Fuxin 123000,China
9 School of Public Health, Peking University, Beijing 100191,China
10 Key Research Base of Philosophy and Social Sciences in Shaanxi Province, Health Culture Research Center of Shaanxi, Xi’an 712046,China
Abstract
Background: To adapt the scientific evaluation tool for the confusion evaluation of health rumors and to test this tool to the confusion evaluation of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)-related health rumors on Chinese online platforms during the outbreak period of COVID-19in China. Methods: The design of our study was systematic evaluation of COVID-19-related health rumors. Retrieved from 7 rumor-repellent platforms, rumors about COVID-19 were collected during the publication from December 1, 2019, to February 6, 2020, and their origins were traced. Researchers evaluated rumors using the confusion evaluation tool in 6 dimensions(creators, evidence selection, evidence evaluation, evidence application, backing and publication platform, conflict of interest). Items were scored using a seven-point Likert scale. The scores were converted into percentages, and the median of rumors from different sources was compared with rank-sum test. Results: Our research included 127 rumors. Scores were converted to percentages, median and interquartile range are used to describe the data. The median score: creators 25.00%(interquartile range, IQR, 16.67-37.50%), evidence selection 27.78% (IQR, 13.89-44.44%),evidence evaluation 33.33% (IQR, 25.00-45.83%), evidence application 36.11% (IQR, 22.22-47.22%), backing and publication platform 8.33% (IQR, 4.17-20.83%), conflict of interest75.00% (IQR, 50.00-83.33%). Almost 40% rumors came from WeChat and the rumors with the lowest scores were concentrated on the WeChat platform. The rumors about prevention methods have relatively lower scores. Conclusion: Most rumors included were not highly confusing for evaluators of this project.WeChat is the “worst-hit area” of COVID-19 related health rumors. More than half rumors focus on the description of prevention methods, which reflects the panic, anxiety and blind conformity of the public under public health emergencies.