Search Results (121)

Cape Verdean immigrants are a growing yet understudied population in the United States (U.S.), with limited data on HPV and cervical cancer prevention knowledge. This descriptive qualitative study explored awareness, knowledge, beliefs, and perceptions related to HPV and cervical cancer prevention among Cape Verdean immigrant mothers of children aged 11–17 residing in Massachusetts, a state in the northeastern U.S. A qualitative descriptive design was used. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 27 Cape Verdean immigrant mothers of adolescents aged 11–17 residing in the study area. Interviews were transcribed, translated, and analyzed thematically using inductive and deductive approaches guided by the literature and emergent narratives. MAXQDA was used for data management, and coding reliability was established through independent review by bilingual researchers. Participants demonstrated varying levels of awareness, ranging from comprehensive understanding to limited knowledge. Two major themes emerged: (1) knowledge and beliefs about cervical cancer and (2) knowledge and beliefs about HPV. Findings revealed fragmented knowledge, misconceptions about screening and transmission, and gendered perceptions of HPV as a “women’s issue.” While many mothers valued prevention and recognized HPV’s link to cervical cancer, uncertainties remained regarding vaccination, screening recommendations, and vaccine effectiveness. Findings highlight the need for culturally and linguistically tailored interventions addressing HPV misinformation, strengthening parental confidence, and supporting Cape Verdean mothers as informed health decision-makers to improve HPV vaccination and cervical cancer prevention. Full article

Background: Vaccine hesitancy has traditionally been understood as a multifactorial phenomenon shaped by individual beliefs, risk perceptions, and access barriers. However, the COVID-19 pandemic has fundamentally transformed the relationship between citizens, science, and public institutions, raising the question of whether vaccine hesitancy has evolved into a broader form of institutional distrust. Objective: This narrative review synthesizes evidence on vaccine confidence, trust dynamics, misinformation, and post-pandemic attitudes to propose a new conceptual framework, i.e., institutional hesitancy, that reframes vaccine acceptance within the wider context of institutional credibility, transparency, and legitimacy. Methods: We conducted a narrative synthesis of peer-reviewed literature, surveillance reports, and cross-national surveys published between 2015 and 2026, focusing on trust in science, governments, public health agencies, healthcare systems, and regulatory authorities as determinants of vaccination behavior. Results: The evidence consistently demonstrates that institutional trust is among the strongest predictors of vaccine acceptance, often surpassing traditional demographic and knowledge-based variables. The pandemic exposed and amplified pre-existing fractures in the relationship between citizens and institutions, creating a legacy of institutional skepticism that extends beyond COVID-19 vaccines to routine immunization programs, seasonal vaccination campaigns, and future pandemic preparedness. Traditional information-based approaches, which assume that knowledge deficits drive hesitancy, have proven insufficient when trust is compromised. Instead, rebuilding vaccine confidence requires sustained investment in institutional transparency, community engagement, and accountable governance. Conclusions: The post-pandemic era calls for a fundamental reconceptualization of vaccine hesitancy. We propose the institutional hesitancy framework as a complementary lens that shifts the analytical focus from individual knowledge deficits to relational dynamics between citizens and institutions. Addressing this challenge requires moving beyond communication campaigns toward long-term strategies that restore institutional trust and strengthen the resilience of public health systems. Full article

This study explored parental concerns regarding their sons’ experiences in a professional football academy, using a case study methodology over a twelve-year period. Drawing on over 60 interviews with parenting pairs, the research identified that concerns were shaped by internal (e.g., personal beliefs), semi-internal (e.g., peer influence, agent input), and external (e.g., social media, educational trends) information sources. These sources often led to misaligned expectations between parents and the academy. The findings highlighted the prevalence of misinformation. In response, a series of targeted interventions were implemented, including structured communication strategies, shared mental models (SMMs), and a refined parent–academy code of conduct. These changes facilitated more integrated parent–athlete–coach relationships and improved clarity around developmental processes. Although causality cannot be established, the frequency of parental complaints decreased over time. This study emphasizes the need for academies to proactively engage parents as key stakeholders through clear, consistent, and evidence-informed communication, ultimately supporting a more coherent developmental experience for athletes. These findings have broad implications for talent development environments aiming to balance athlete and parent welfare with high-performance goals. Full article

Much research on misinformation has focused on claims that challenge mainstream views. This study instead examines misinformation that is aligned with dominant narratives in mainstream news media. It uses an epistemically grounded definition of misinformation and a measurement approach that accounts for the complexity of politically relevant misinformation. The analysis centers on 20 false or misleading claims about major international issues, evaluated by a sample of 1590 survey respondents in German-speaking Switzerland. Across these claims, the population-weighted share of “fully agree” responses ranged from 6% to 50%. The probability of acceptance of misinformation was significantly associated (p < 0.05) with several factors: male gender (+0.04); medium or higher education (−0.06 and −0.05, respectively); more than 30 min of daily news consumption, compared with less (+0.06); identification with Green (+0.09) and Liberal party (+0.07, relative to Center party); medium trust in government (−0.04), relative to high trust; and a non-mainstream primary news source (−0.28), relative to public television. A similar pattern emerges for the subset of the claims that had been publicly corrected. Notable differences from patterns reported for non-mainstream misinformation highlight the importance of the type of misinformation under study. Taken together—and in light of evidence that news consumers expect truthful and impartial information—these findings suggest that misinformation in mainstream news media warrants greater attention in both research and regulatory policy. Full article

In organizational cyber crises, incident response and official communication form coupled control loops, yet they are usually engineered separately. We present V-CHIMERA (Verified Coupled Human–Information–Machine Incident Response Architecture), a framework for organizational cyber crisis response under misinformation that jointly models cyber state, belief dynamics, trust, and communication governance. The framework combines three elements: an explicit cyber–social coupling architecture, a runtime protocol shield for communication safety, and immune-gated coupling (IGC) that uses danger signaling, tolerance thresholds, and immune memory to regulate when social feedback should affect operational response and how strongly counter-messaging should be targeted. Across three representative scenarios—ransomware rumor, outage rumor, and exfiltration scam—and eight seeds per scenario, all shielded policies achieved zero executed protocol violations. Relative to naive coupled control, IGC reduced cyber-harm area under the curve (AUC) by 57.6% in ransomware rumor and 42.6% in outage rumor while also reducing misbelief. Results were scenario-dependent rather than uniformly dominant: in exfiltration scam, a broadcast-only ablation outperformed targeted messaging, showing that targeting can fail when diffusion rapidly crosses community boundaries. Sensitivity analysis further shows that IGC attenuates the brittleness observed under strong coupling and weak moderation. The results suggest that biomimetic regulation is valuable not because coupling always helps, but because it prevents overreaction, clarifies when targeting should be used, and yields safer organizational defaults for misinformation-aware incident response. Full article

Recent studies have shown a growing prevalence of autism spectrum disorders, accompanied by heightened concerns about the impact of misinformation on autism stigmatization, shaping public perceptions of autism. With the increase in autism cases worldwide, it is critical to have sufficient understanding, knowledge, and awareness about autism, especially among the autism information seekers. This study focused on the progression of autism information over time and investigated the relationships among various factors such as autism knowledge, awareness, stigma, misinformation, cultural beliefs, and social norms. Employing a two-phase research design approach comprising systematic literature review and survey, the study indicated an overall increase in autism knowledge and awareness, although it revealed disparities in certain ethnicities and areas such as genetic testing. Despite advancements, stigma was found to persist. Survey findings validated these observations, emphasizing the necessity for heightened autism awareness and the continued presence of stigma. Furthermore, the survey demonstrated that knowledge influences awareness, whereas cultural beliefs and social norms directly affect autism misinformation. Importantly, the study highlighted how cultural beliefs, and misinformation can hinder accurate understanding and knowledge of autism, potentially exacerbating stigma. By employing evidence-based approaches, this study offers comprehensive insights into autism, enriching the broader literature on the subject. Full article

This study examines the influence of misinformation on vaccination decision-making and the perception of social security in Romania in the context of potential future pandemics. Using a survey-based design, data were collected through an online questionnaire administered to a sample of 1005 respondents. The analysis employed descriptive and inferential statistical methods, including chi-square tests, ANOVA, Kruskal–Wallis tests, principal component analysis (PCA), K-means clustering, random forest models, and Spearman correlations. The results indicate statistically significant associations between belief in misinformation and vaccination attitudes (p < 0.001), with moderate effect sizes. Effect size estimates indicated small-to-moderate associations (e.g., Cramér’s V up to 0.371 for key demographic differences, and Kendall’s W = 0.273 for the increase in willingness across the three severity scenarios). Individuals with higher levels of education, urban residence, and younger age were more likely to report higher willingness to vaccinate, whereas respondents from rural areas and those with lower educational levels showed greater susceptibility to misinformation. In addition, risk perception was significantly associated with vaccination intention, which increased as the severity of hypothetical pandemic scenarios intensified. Predictive modeling identified specific misinformation beliefs—particularly those related to vaccine safety and natural immunity—as key factors associated with vaccination decisions. These findings suggest that misinformation is strongly associated with both individual vaccination behavior and broader perceptions of social security. Full article

Online misinformation has grown significantly with the widespread use of the internet and the ease of sharing content through social media, often without rigorous fact-checking or scientific validation. In this context, we examined the effect of trust in scientists and conspiracy beliefs on online misinformation susceptibility and fake news detection. A cross-sectional study was carried out. We used valid questionnaires to collect our data. Trust in scientists was assessed using the Trust in Scientists Scale. Conspiracy beliefs were measured using the Conspiracy Mentality Questionnaire. Participants’ susceptibility to online misinformation was evaluated using the Online Misinformation Susceptibility Scale. Our multivariable analysis identified that lower trust in scientists is associated with higher online misinformation susceptibility. Participants who believed in conspiracy behaviors showed also higher levels of misinformation susceptibility. Our multivariable model showed that participants who believe in conspiracy beliefs had a lower ability to detect fake news. We found a positive association between trust in sciences and fake news detection. We identified a negative association between interest in politics and fake news detection. Our findings showed associations between trust in scientists, conspiracy beliefs, online misinformation susceptibility and fake news detection. Identification of predictors of these outcomes is crucial to define high-risk groups and develop appropriate interventions to confront these issues. Full article

This paper argues that al-Ghazali’s (1058–1111) distinction between taqlid (uncritical acceptance of authority) and ijtihad (independent reasoning) can offer a normative response to the contemporary challenge of fake news, thereby connecting a medieval epistemic framework to a pressing twenty-first-century problem. This study treats fake news as both an epistemic and an ethical challenge. Epistemically, fake news undermines the aim of belief, which is the aspiration toward truth, by introducing and sustaining falsehoods within the testimonial networks on which individuals depend for knowledge. Ethically, it constitutes a form of deception that manipulates audiences, corrodes intellectual virtues such as honesty, and disintegrates the trust between individuals and public institutions that is essential for collective life. Methodologically, this paper adopts an analytical–critical approach. It examines recent philosophical literature on the epistemology of misinformation, reconstructs al-Ghazali’s taqlid–ijtihad framework from his original texts, and then adapts it to the conditions of digital information environments. The resulting model distinguishes between digital ijtihad, the responsible and competent verification of online information, and justified digital taqlid, the legitimate reliance on credible digital authorities when independent verification is impractical. The findings suggest that this adapted framework not only enriches contemporary epistemic theory but also offers practical normative guidance for cultivating responsible belief formation, including in educational contexts where teaching itself functions as a structured form of testimonial exchange. Full article

The easily defanged myth that baby rattlesnakes (genera Crotalus and Sistrurus) are more dangerous than adults has persisted in North America despite all evidence to the contrary. The most often cited reason for the babies-more-dangerous (BMD) myth is the venom-dump (VD) hypothesis: babies, in contrast to adults, cannot control how much venom they expend, and therefore inject all of it when biting. We undertook three approaches to explore the origin, transmission, and prevalence of this myth and its most frequent explanation. First, we examined historical newspaper accounts. From 130 newspaper stories mentioning the relative danger of baby rattlesnakes, we identified a timeline in which (1) most stories prior to 1969 were factually correct; (2) the BMD myth and VD hypothesis likely originated in the mid-to-late 1960s and became entrenched in California, especially, from 1970 to 1999; (3) factually incorrect statements subsequently prevailed throughout North America from 2000 to 2014; and (4) factually correct stories regained prominence with apparent effective messaging success from 2015 onward. We further learned that general information stories about rattlesnakes, more often citing subject experts like university professors, were much more likely to provide accurate information than local snakebite stories, which more often cited health professionals (e.g., physicians, veterinarians, pharmacists) and emergency responders (e.g., police and fire officers) who frequently supplied misinformation. Second, we surveyed familiarity with the BMD myth and VD hypothesis among 53 university classrooms (including one high school) representing 3751 students across 29 states within the United States. Consistent with the California media’s outsized influence on misinformation transmission, familiarity with the myth was greatest in the southwestern states (52.6%) and declined moving north and east, with the least familiarity in the northeastern states (16.4%). Third, a small survey of 75 emergency responders and health professionals from Southern California revealed that a whopping 73.3% actually believed the BMD myth. Numerous organizations generally regarded as authoritative further amplified the misinformation, especially on the internet, where some content persists to this day. Unfortunately, belief in the BMD myth and VD hypothesis can lead to negative consequences, including misinformed risk-taking by those encountering snakes, unwarranted fear among snakebite victims, and inappropriate care delivered by misinformed or patient/family-pressured medical professionals. Our findings target health professionals and emergency responders as priority audiences for education. Full article

Background/Objectives: Vaccine hesitancy arises from multiple determinants, including individual beliefs, cognitive style, social norms, political identity and the information environment. In this context, health literacy, e-health literacy, susceptibility to health misinformation, conspiracy beliefs and trust in science may be relevant in mediatized societies. Aim: The aim of the study was to examine how susceptibility to health misinformation relates to vaccine hesitancy in Poland and how this association is influenced by health literacy, e-health literacy, trust in scientists and sociodemographic factors. Methods: Data came from a web-based survey conducted in December 2024 among 2200 adults aged 18–75 years. The questionnaire included validated scales of vaccine hesitancy, health literacy, e-health literacy, vaccine conspiracy beliefs and trust in scientists. The susceptibility to health misinformation was measured with ad hoc instrument based on the statement from fact-checking services. Items assessing digital media use, political sympathies, religious practices and sociodemographics were also applied. Multivariable linear regression was applied with continuous vaccine hesitancy as the dependent variable. Results: The model explained 57.8% of the variance in vaccine hesitancy. Susceptibility to misinformation (B = 0.11, 95% CI: 0.08–0.15) and vaccine conspiracy beliefs (B = 0.44, 95% CI: 0.41–0.46) were positive predictors, whereas trust in scientists (B = −0.20, 95% CI: −0.23–−0.17) and e-health literacy (B = −0.07, 95% CI: −0.11–−0.02) were protective. Older age was associated with lower hesitancy (B = −0.02, 95% CI: −0.03–0.00). Secondary education (B = −0.58) and a master’s degree (B = −0.77) predicted lower hesitancy. Health literacy categories were not significantly related to vaccine hesitancy. Conclusions: Susceptibility to health misinformation and vaccine conspiracy beliefs were key predictors of vaccine hesitancy, outweighing the effects of health literacy and the protective impact of trust in scientists and e-health literacy, and indicating a need for interventions that combine prebunking and literacy-focused strategies with efforts to strengthen confidence in health institutions. Full article

Background/Objectives: Seasonal influenza imposes a significant burden on pediatric public health. Despite official recommendations and full insurance coverage, vaccination rates among children in Slovakia remain critically low. This study aims to analyze the attitudes, beliefs, and determinants of parental hesitancy regarding childhood influenza vaccination in the post-pandemic context. Methods: A single-center cross-sectional survey was conducted between February and March 2025 using convenience sampling among parents of children attending a pediatric immunoallergology center. An anonymous questionnaire collected data on demographics, risk perception, and attitudes. Data from 301 parents were analyzed using descriptive statistics, chi-squared tests, and odds ratios (OR) to identify key predictors of hesitancy. Results: Only 27.6% of parents expressed willingness to vaccinate their children, while 42.5% were opposed and 29.9% hesitant. Statistical analysis revealed no significant association between parental university education and vaccination intent (p > 0.05), indicating that vaccine hesitancy in this specific setting was present across all educational backgrounds. However, the source of information proved to be a critical determinant: consulting a pediatrician significantly increased the odds of acceptance (OR = 6.32; 95% CI: 3.54–11.28), whereas reliance on the internet and social media was a significant predictor of refusal (OR = 0.29; 95% CI: 0.17–0.50). The primary reported barrier was fear of adverse effects (70.4%), which significantly outweighed doubts about efficacy (30.2%). Conclusions: Parental hesitancy in Slovakia is a widespread phenomenon pervasive across all educational backgrounds, driven primarily by safety concerns and digital misinformation. The contrast between the protective influence of pediatricians and the negative impact of digital media underscores that clinical encounters are currently the most effective firewall against hesitancy. Public health strategies must therefore pivot from general education to empowering pediatricians with active, presumptive communication strategies. Full article

Background: Tribulus terrestris (Tt) is a popular herbal supplement marketed to enhance fitness performance, despite inconclusive evidence regarding its efficacy and safety. This study aimed to investigate the prevalence of TT use, awareness, and motivations for its use among recreational athletes in Italy, helping to address the lack of empirical data describing who actually uses Tt, for what purposes, and with what behavioral risks. Methods: A cross-sectional anonymous survey was administered between May and October 2024 across Italian gyms and fitness clubs using Microsoft Forms. A total of 696 individuals initiated the questionnaire; after removal of duplicate, incomplete and ineligible entries, 510 responses were analyzed. Two indicators of Tt consumption were assessed: ever use and current use, with the latter designated as the primary outcome. A multivariable logistic regression evaluated predictors of current Tt use, entering sex, age category (18–24, 25–34, 35–44, ≥45 years), and motivation for supplement consumption. Results: Current Tt use was reported by 7.8% of respondents, while 10.5% declared ever using a Tt-containing product. Motivation was the only independent predictor of Tt consumption (p = 0.012). Individuals reporting performance enhancement as their primary motivation were markedly more likely to currently use Tt, compared with those using supplements for other purposes (adjusted OR ≈ 18.5; p = 0.008). Neither sex (p = 0.918) nor age category (p = 0.519) significantly predicted Tt use. Admission of anabolic steroid use was infrequent but was linked to online purchasing from potentially unregulated sources. Conclusions: Tt consumption in fitness settings is driven predominantly by performance-oriented expectations rather than demographic characteristics. The observed discrepancy between consumer beliefs and scientific evidence suggests a pressing need for educational interventions and regulatory vigilance in sports nutrition. Public health policies should focus on improving label literacy, strengthening consumer protection, and countering misinformation within supplement marketing environments. Full article

Background: Vaccinations are essential to protect travelers from infectious diseases, especially in high-risk destinations. However, awareness and adherence to vaccination recommendations vary, influenced by communication, personal beliefs, and behavior. Methods: A focus group was conducted in February 2025 at a local health authority in central Italy, specifically within its travel clinic, to explore travelers’ awareness, attitudes, and behaviors regarding vaccination. The discussion was analyzed using the “3Cs” Vaccine Hesitancy model. Participants were purposively selected to ensure diversity and representativeness. Discussions included past travel experiences, knowledge of required vaccines, motivations for immunization, and barriers to access. Results: Four key thematic areas emerged: socio-cultural/environmental factors, psychological/emotional influences, knowledge/information access, and general health perceptions. Communication gaps often weakened belief in vaccine efficacy and necessity. Cultural background, past experiences, and risk perception heavily influenced decisions. Discussion: Although vaccination is widely viewed as a protective measure, vaccine hesitancy persists due to misinformation and limited institutional trust. The COVID-19 pandemic intensified both awareness and skepticism. The 3Cs model clarified hesitancy levels and barriers, emphasizing the need for effective communication and trust-building. Conclusions: Enhancing access to accurate information, strengthening healthcare professionals’ communicative role, and reducing economic obstacles are crucial. Tailored awareness campaigns and integrated health policies are essential to increasing vaccine uptake, safeguarding traveler health, and limiting global disease spread. Patient or Public Contribution: Members of the public contributed to this study by participating in a focus group, where they shared their personal experiences, perceptions, and opinions regarding travel-related vaccinations. Their insights provided valuable qualitative data that helped inform the study’s findings. However, they were not involved in the study design, the analysis of the data, or the preparation of the manuscript. The role of participants was limited to the data collection phase of the study. Full article

Background/Objectives: This study aims to evaluate COVID-19 parental vaccine hesitancy (CPVH) and refusal among parents of children between 5 and 11 years and to identify potential factors influencing them. A secondary aim was to assess knowledge, concerns, and beliefs associated with COVID-19 and immunization. Methods: This cross-sectional study was conducted among parents of children between 5 and 11 years using an anonymous, self-administered questionnaire. Sociodemographic characteristics, knowledge, concerns, and beliefs regarding COVID-19 and immunization in children; CPVH according to Parent Attitudes about Childhood Vaccines short scale; COVID-19 vaccination status and intention; and sources of information about COVID-19 vaccination were investigated. Results: Among 506 participating parents, only 12.7% correctly answered all six knowledge items. High CPVH was found in 60.1% of respondents and was more prevalent among younger parents and those with lower knowledge levels. Compared to having received no information on COVID-19 vaccination, high CPVH was positively associated with having received information from informal sources and trusting them and negatively associated with information from formal ones. More than half (58.3%) had vaccinated their child, and 38.5% had no intention to vaccinate their child against COVID-19. High CPVH, lower knowledge levels, and a need for further information were significant predictors of vaccine refusal. Conversely, refusal was negatively associated with parental COVID-19 vaccination status, and with having received information from formal and from both formal and informal sources compared to not having received information. Conclusions: The findings highlight the need for establishing and investing in platforms to promote vaccine awareness and dispelling misinformation among parents. Full article