An exploration of how fake news is taking over social media and putting public health at risk.

Recent statistics show that almost 1/4 of a million people have died and four million people are affected either with mild or serious health problems caused by coronavirus (COVID-19). These numbers are rapidly increasing (World Health Organization, May 3, 2020c). There is much concern during this pandemic about the spread of misleading or inaccurate information. This article reports on a small study which attempted to identify the types and sources of COVID-19 misinformation. The authors identified and analysed 1225 pieces of COVID-19 fake news stories taken from fact-checkers, myth-busters and COVID-19 dashboards. The study is significant given the concern raised by the WHO Director-General that 'we are not just fighting the pandemic, we are also fighting infodemic'. The study concludes that the COVID-19 infodemic is full of false claims, half backed conspiracy theories and pseudoscientific therapies, regarding the diagnosis, treatment, prevention, origin and spread of the virus. Fake news is pervasive in social media, putting public health at risk. The scale of the crisis and ubiquity of the misleading information require that scientists, health information professionals and journalists exercise their professional responsibility to help the general public identify fake news stories. They should ensure that accurate information is published and disseminated.J.M.

The Covid-19 'infodemic': a new front for information professionals.

The virus, commonly known as COVID-19 which emerged in Wuhan, China, in December 2019, has spread in 213 countries, areas or territories around the globe, with nearly 144 683 deaths worldwide on 18 April 2020. In the wake of this pandemic, we have witnessed a massive infodemic with the public being bombarded with vast quantities of information, much of which is not scientifically correct. Fighting fake news is now the new front in the COVID-19 battle. This regular feature comments on the role of health sciences librarians and information professionals in combating the COVID-19 infodemic. To support their work, it draws attention to the myth busters, fact-checkers and credible sources relating to COVID-19. It also documents the guides that libraries have put together to help the general public, students and faculty recognise fake news.

COVID-19 (Coronavirus) Pandemic: Information Sources Channels for the Public Health Awareness.

The main purpose of this paper is to highlight the important information sources of the Public Health awareness used by the library and information sources in this Pandemic situation. Social distancing phase Information professional used a different medium to connect with their patron and try to serve the best manner. The role of the information professional in health information and health literacy is very vital. Information professional public health awareness information with the library patrons and the general public. In this paper, the researchers provide a brief introduction to different information channel support in information dissemination.

Measures of self-efficacy among doctors in conducting an online search for clinical decision making.

OBJECTIVES: To measure the perceived ability and level of confidence among doctors in performing the different tasks involved in conducting an online search for clinical decision making. METHODS: A large-scale cross-sectional survey was conducted in 36 District Headquarter Hospitals (DHQs), 89 Tehsil Headquarter Hospitals (THQs), 293 Rural Health Centers (RHCs) and 2455 Basic Health Units (BHUs) in Punjab, Pakistan. Using a quota sampling, data were collected from 517 doctors on a set of 11 statements. The collected data were analysed statistically. RESULTS: Of the 517 doctors, 73 (14.1%) had 'never accessed health care information online' for clinical decision making. Mean values of the doctors' response to the 11 statements ranged from 1.66 to 2.30 indicating that most of the doctors were 'not confident' in their ability to perform the tasks. CONCLUSION: The majority of doctors perceived themselves able to perform the different tasks involved in conducting an online search. Age and working experience were significant factors in the perception of their ability in performing the tasks. The study recommends promotional and educational activities to motivate interest, increase awareness, develop knowledge and skills for doctors to access information that would help in their clinical decision making.

Proposed information outreach programme in primary and secondary health care of Punjab, Pakistan.

The study reported is part of Dr. Naeem's doctoral research, supervised by Professor Bhatti, with the objective to propose an information outreach programme for health care professionals working in rural areas of the Punjab province, Pakistan. A cross-sectional survey was conducted involving 517 practitioners from across different health care facilities in the area. The goals of the outreach programme are identified on the basis of the findings regarding practitioners' current usage and awareness of, as well as attitude and self-efficacy towards using health information resources. The identification of these goals and their related activities, including logistical, promotional and educational, results in a model of the required inputs and investments to achieve both the short term, intermediate and long term results of the programme. F.J.

Clinical information needs and access in primary health care: a comparative cross-sectional study of rural and non-rural primary care physicians.

BACKGROUND: Primary care physicians (PCPs) need a wide range of clinical information (CI) resources to manage their patients. Continued access to these resources in their practice settings provides self-reliance and a better approach towards clinical decision making. OBJECTIVE: To compare the PCPs CI needs and access to CI in rural versus non-rural practice setting. METHODS: A comparative cross-sectional survey was conducted in the Government health centres of the District of Multan, Pakistan. PCPs were classified into rural and non-rural according to their practice setting using the State Office of Rural Health definition. Rural means 'more than 10 miles from a population centre of 30 000 or more'. RESULTS: The CI needs of rural and non-rural PCPs were the same, but rural PCPs had significantly less access to nearly all CI resources when compared to non-rural PCPs. Age was a major determining factor of perceived information needs for continuing medical education but not for accessing CI. DISCUSSION: Primary care physicians in rural settings face innumerable difficulties in accessing the required CI due to non-existence of libraries and poor information infrastructure. CONCLUSION: Despite no difference in information needs, rural PCPs have significantly less access to CI resources. The study suggests ways to address the inequality in provision of CI resources.