Keynote "Building a Healthy Information Environment: Exploring the Surgeon General's Advisory and Community Toolkit on Health Misinformation" Kyla Fullenwider, Senior Advisor in the Office of the Surgeon General.

Despite growing concerns and rapidly expanding research about health misinformation, answers to some fundamental questions remain unclear. Among the open questions are the definition of health misinformation (what is health misinformation?), the psychological drivers of susceptibility to health misinformation (why do people believe it?), and effective interventions for reducing the impact of health misinformation (how to counter it?). In our recent work which informs the current presentation, we seek to answer these questions by proposing a tentative definition for health misinformation, a comprehensive psychological model of susceptibility to health misinformation, and a systematic framework for countering health misinformation, while addressing ongoing debate about the scale of the misinformation problem and the effectiveness of fact-based corrections.

Objectives

• Stimulate discussion about the nature and boundaries of health misinformation.
• Stimulate discussion about the psychological drivers of susceptibility to health misinformation.
• Stimulate discussion about optimal solutions to reducing the spread and impact of health misinformation.

Librarians and educators are accustomed to treating information and media literacy as broadly subject agnostic. It is therefore not surprising that we have positioned ourselves on the front lines against the spread of mis/disinformation about COVID-19. As with other kinds of sources, we show students how to identify markers of unreliability and reliability, and how to read laterally in order to fact check. Once students can do this, we hope they will not believe or spread health mis/disinformation about COVID. Research in science and health communication, however, indicates that evaluating health journalism comes with its own particular issues. In this presentation, I will discuss three of these issues: the media framing of how science in general works, how science/health journalists get information about research, and the particular tells of unreliable health journalism. In each case, I will suggest some approaches/tools that will help address these issues in information literacy instruction around COVID.

Objectives
Attendees will be able to:

• identify some of the particular challenges of evaluating health journalism.
• Adapt their COVID-19 information literacy teaching to address these challenges.

In 2021, the San Diego County Board of Supervisors declared health misinformation a public health crisis and adopted a series of measures to actively address it. Library directors of the San Diego Circuit consortium agreed to work together to support the County’s efforts to counter health misinformation in the community. Each library appointed a representative, which included health sciences librarians from the academic libraries and adult services librarians involved in health outreach from the public libraries. This group became the Advisory Team for the newly created San Diego Health Information Partnership, a network of library workers in San Diego County, sharing a concern about health misinformation and striving to make a positive difference.

The goal of the Advisory Team is to support the County by promoting reliable health information sources and building resilience to health misinformation among community members. The Advisory Team advocates for Circuit member libraries to:

• Advance the health information literacy support efforts at our libraries
• Develop new Circuit partnerships and initiatives to build health misinformation resilience in our local communities.

The final priorities developed for the group were to: build a guide of reliable health information sources, build reference skills among library personnel and develop a referral guide, develop a network of libraries to proactively address health misinformation, and conduct instruction and events for the community. The Circuit library directors had priorities to engage public officials, engage community advocates, invite experts to work with libraries, and find ways to train health workers on information literacy issues. This session will describe the collaboration among six libraries in San Diego County along with the progress the group has made towards their goals. Current work includes a ‘Find Reliable Health Information’ guide (libguides.sdsu.edu/health), online outreach efforts, and fact sheets developed to build community members’ resilience to health misinformation.

The presentation will also highlight a current effort to build an online outreach campaign which has been funded by NNLM. Developed tools, resources and best practice observations will be shared during the presentation. Collaborations with NNLM Region 5 for library worker training and the San Diego County public health department for information sharing will also be discussed. Attendees will come away from the session with strategies for engaging in cross-library initiatives that empower local communities and libraries to address health misinformation.

Objectives:

• Attendees will be able to describe how a multi-institutional collaboration can help address large-scale issues.
• Additionally, attendees will learn about best practices for enabling collaborative efforts between academic and public libraries to address the spread of health misinformation.
• Attendees will be able to list potential actions that public and academic libraries can take to address health misinformation in their communities.

Building off of a preliminary report presented at the NNLM 2021 Symposium, this presentation will describe the development of a teaching module deployed through the Public Health Science department at a mid-sized midwestern university. Focusing on key considerations in assessing whether information is truthful vs. misleading, this module illustrates such questions as “What is a fact? What is an opinion? What makes them different from each other?” using public health-related examples, ranging from lead in gasoline to COVID-19.

The presenters will discuss the design process that informs each element of the module, the module's integration into the university's learning management system to facilitate student access, and what specific learning outcomes each module element is designed to foster. Finally the presenters will discuss how best to assess this module for teaching effectiveness.

Objectives:

• Audience members will learn about the creative process that has gone into this teaching module, in particular through the use of replicable discussionpoints drawn from public health issues presented through the different module elements.
• Audience members will also learn how they can themselves design and build their own tool for a similar purpose at their home institutions.

This is 1 of 2 presentations for the Auditorium A. Presentations will be back-to-back with Q&A after the second presentation.

Standards for evaluating scientific evidence for clinical practice specific to the field of personalized nutrition are lacking. The scientific rigor supporting hegemonic frameworks of nutrition recommendations has been frequently called into question. Public nutrition guidance is not widely adhered to due to a lack of clarity, practicality, or applicability. Few professional organizations have standardized guidelines for evaluating nutrition science that could offer viable alternatives to public nutrition guidance.

Furthermore, nutrition guidance to professionals and the public can be confusing, misleading, or inaccurate. Conflicting interests and bias abound due to a variety of confounding factors including, but not limited to: methodological inaccuracies, self reporting bias among study participants, conflicts of interest in nutrition research, industry and commercial influence, practitioner bias, political complexities, and lobbying efforts. Researchers, clinicians, politicians, lobbyists, and the public all participate in the miasma of nutrition information. Food and eating can be highly polarizing. Many, not just decision-makers, have ideological fidelity and loyalty to food and eating philosophies. The purpose of this presentation is to present a standardized, evidence-based framework for evaluating nutrition science within a national nutrition organization. We evaluated existing frameworks used for determining scientific validity in translational healthcare fields and modified a validated paradigm to the area of nutrition. This work will lay the foundation for the American Nutrition Association to identify practice and research gaps and develop evidence-based clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) to advise nutrition professionals and, ultimately, the public on the strength and benefit of current evidence related to distinct nutrition interventions in a given population.

Objectives:

• Identify factors that render nutrition information confusing, misleading, or inaccurate
• List three reasons why nutrition guidance is not widely adhered to in the United States Discuss the impact of implementing an evidence-based model for evaluating nutrition science within a national nutrition organization

This is 2 of 2 presentations for the Auditorium A. Presentations will be back-to-back with Q&A after the second presentation.

10 minute lightning talk that will present practical information that can be used a toolkit for health care professionals, community organizations and civic groups to communicate with members of their community . The toolkit will focus on recognizing and combating healthcare misinformation.

Objectives: After the presentation, the attendee will be able to

• identify healthcare misinformation when presented in electronic format
• discuss measures that can be easily implemented to address ehealth misinformation.

Mis and Dis information on the internet abounds. When that information stays unexamined – people's lives are at play. Take the COVID-19 pandemic – misinformation literally costs lives. What can the COVID-19 pandemic tell us about science literacy in the United States? What made the general public so distrustful of traditional authority when it comes to science? The pandemic demonstrated how lack of science literacy is a danger to our health.

This discussion will explore science and health influencers online and how they can be used in the classroom to improve science literacy skills. Can we apply the principles of evidence based practice to evaluating science in the media? There are media influencers such as John Oliver, Rebecca Watson and Mama Doctor Jones (amongst many others!) using their expertise and platforms to demonstrate science literacy through exploration of reliable (and unreliable) evidence.

Academic Librarians are often tasked with teaching information literacy skills according to the ACRL Framework. While these skills are essential to college level research and writing – they are also required for navigating the every day bombardment of information that we get from the media. How can academic librarians integrate these media influencers into their teaching in order to teach evidence based science literacy skills for use in the "real world". Science literacy does not require being a science expert – it means being able to rely on those who are experts and discern evidence from reliable sources. Science and health headlines are often over simplified and sensationalized – how can we used evidence-based practice principles to come to our own conclusions?

Objectives:

• Participants will recognize how science influencers can be role models for our students.
• Participants will examine methods for integrating science influencers and the concept of science literacy into their broader information literacy teaching.
• Participants will be empowered to use non-traditional media and information formats to reach students and demonstrate science interpretation skills for use in academia and real life.

This session will feature the playing of a misinformation escape room designed for cancer patients and survivors who are frequently the targets of cancer nutrition misinformation, and the sharing of pilot study findings of the game. Traditionally, evidence-based health information and information literacy skills have been promoted as remedies to misinformation. However, research on how misinformation works and the reasons people hold certain beliefs pose challenges to these approaches. Building on the design and distribution of a misinformation escape room for the general public, this project extends this work to address cancer nutrition misinformation in partnership with the Fred Hutch Cancer Center.

The aim is to create an immersive learning experience which focuses on a number of cognitive biases, emotional triggers, and other affective attributes associated with cancer nutrition misinformation. In this session participants will have the opportunity to play the game, after which the research team will share the results of a pilot study and facilitate an open discussion. For more information about the project, please visit www.lokisloop.org

Objectives:

• To raise awareness and encourage discussion on the opportunities and challenges of game-based approaches for building mis(information) literacy on personal health topics
• To discuss lessons learned from using games for health education
• To discuss approaches and methods for assessing the impact of game-based learning

This is 1 of 2 presentations for the Auditorium B. Presentations will be back-to-back with Q&A after the second presentation.

Through funding from NSF and NIH, a team of scientists and artists created comics and art resources to share accurate health information about the COVID-19 pandemic and vaccines. The first resource we will share is the C’RONA Pandemic Comix collection/book (Hall, Diamond, VanWormer, & gaiashkibos, 2021). In a recently published study, we randomly assigned four comic conditions to over 200 youth aged 10-14, then asked them questions about science and health to assess if the comics increased their knowledge (Hill et al., 2022). We also asked youth about where they got information about COVID-19 and looked at how knowledgeable they were about science and health topics related to COVID-19 and pandemics. We found that youth who listed more sources of information about COVID-19 had more accurate knowledge after controlling for other variables (Hill et al., 2022). We will also share a resource created from an NIH Vaccine Hesitancy Supplement Award (3R25GM129836-04S1, 2021-2022) our team received in 2021. Using an open call, the PIs sought artists’ submissions related to reducing vaccine hesitancy, which resulted in 33 art pieces selected by a panel of expert judges in both epidemiology and art. Those 33 and an additional 13 commissioned works were turned into an exhibit Vaccinate: Posters from the COVID-19 Pandemic” displayed at multiple local venues. To increase accessibility, the posters were compiled as a book that is available for purchase. In addition, all posters are free online as high-resolution images through our NIH project website. Both outreach projects meaningfully engaged Tribal partners and artists to create culturally relevant materials for broad audiences, which intentionally include Native youth and communities.

Objectives:

• To share unique resources that feature comics and art to battle health misinformation about COVID-19 and Vaccines
• To share research about how comics are an effective way to share accurate science and health information to youth.

This is 2 of 2 presentations for the Auditorium C. Presentations will be back-to-back with Q&A after the second presentation.

About 22% of eligible U.S. adults have not completed the primary COVID-19 vaccine series; nearly half of eligible U.S. adults have not received a single booster dose. Lower health literacy appears to be an important contributor to COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy, increasing individuals' vulnerability to misinformation and disinformation. Due to educational inequities, low health literacy disproportionately impacts Black, Indigenous, and Latino/Latina/Latinx communities, and this may help explain disparities in vaccine uptake in some communities. Health professionals across the country are reporting growing intolerance for patients who remain unvaccinated, which may further exacerbate inequities in care, and disparities in COVID-19 outcomes. Examining COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and misinformation through a health literacy lens is expected to help health professionals empathize with unvaccinated patients, and provide new communication approaches to preventing and overcoming misinformation, in order to help ensure more equitable informed decision-making across communities.

Objectives:

• Describe ways that health literacy may influence COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy.
• Identify health literacy challenges which patients and caregivers face in understanding COVID-19-related information.
• Identify clear communication strategies for addressing COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy.

This presentation will introduce the audience to the framework of Critical Cultural Literacy as a method of combating online health misinformation and disinformation affecting BIPOC communities. Critical Cultural Literacy binds seven other literacy concepts together (cultural literacy, critical information literacy, media and design literacies, historical literacy, emotional literacy, political literacy, and racial literacy) to produce a framework in which BIPOC information consumers can interrogate information that they encounter online for accuracy. In understanding Critical Cultural Literacy, information consumers should be able to exercise some skeptism if they encounter information that is not sound when viewed through the lens of one or more of the component literacies.

Objectives: After attending this session, attendees will:

• Know what Critical Cultural Literacy is and how the component literacies work together to produce this approach to vetting online health information.
• Be able to identify some of the unique challenges that affect BIPOC populations as they encounter health information online.

The Latine population are the largest minority group in the United States and, after Asians, they are the fastest growing. According to a 2015 Pew Center Research survey, Hispanics represent 17% of the population, at 54 million individuals in the US. Between 2000 and 2010 alone, this group accounted for more than half of the U.S. population growth in the U.S. The growing Latine population reveals the need for credible and reliable health information for this population, and specifically the need for this information to be made available in Spanish. With the higher demand for (health) information and the fewer news sources (print and online), as well as having fewer resources for combating misinformation, Spanish-speaking Latines are more vulnerable to misinformation than their English-speaking counterparts.

This presentation will begin by sharing cultural insights on the growing and diverse Latine population, priority health concerns, and their preferred methods of accessing health information. The presenter will share some of the evidence-based research as well as introducing some practices currently being used to tackle health misinformation within this community.

Objectives:

• Attendees will get some insight about the Latine community, their priority health concerns and preferred methods for accessing health information
• Attendees will become aware of the current research and practices being used to address health misinformation within the Latinx community

The surgeon general recently declared misinformation a health threat. Throughout the pandemic, false rumors of treatments and vaccine side effects spread widely on social media. Doctors, nurses and other medical staff are spending more and more of their time in the clinic addressing medical conspiracies. In this talk, I will provide examples of medical misinformation, how we may have got here, and the potential health impacts of this growing problem. I will also discuss potential interventions, with a special focus on the role of librarians in reducing the spread of misinformation.

Nurses, as some of the most trusted members of the healthcare profession, can play a key role in dispelling rising health mis- and disinformation in the healthcare setting. However, few nursing training programs integrate instruction about the skills to do so into curricular content. Our interdisciplinary group, led by librarians, created a set of three grant-funded modules that address the problem of dis- and misinformation, how to evaluate health-related claims online, and how to talk with patients and colleagues about health topics depending on their exposure or risk of exposure to dis- and misinformation. In this presentation, attendees will learn about these open educational modules and their incorporation of pre-bunking and motivational interviewing as strategies that they can use in future patient interactions. While pre-bunking works as a prophylaxis when patients have not been exposed to potentially dangerous information about health-related matters, motivational interviewing is implemented once patients have been exposed to misinformation. Attendees will be able to view these modules and learn how to integrate them in their own context.

Objectives:

• Attendees will be able to describe the strategies of pre-bunking and motivational interviewing.
• Attendees will be able to outline the best strategy to use when dispelling misinformation depending on the context.
• Attendees will be able to locate the open educational modules and apply them for their own use.

When thinking about the 19th-century cholera epidemic, it may at first seem completely isolated from the present, but there are layers upon layers of connections to be made. A few modern health disparities include; the availability of resources to diverse groups, financial expenses, and the lack of comprehension of health materials; all of these disparity gaps have been enlarged by the COVID-19 pandemic. People of the nineteenth century dealt with the same health inequalities that people are dealing with today, which begs why haven’t things improved, or if they have, why has culture reverted to this sub-optimal norm? If health information and health services have improved, why can so many similarities be found when reading through history books?

This study aims to identify the primary issues presented by the 19th cholera epidemics, how health information was delivered and received, and who had authority over health matters. More importantly, this study will compare nineteenth-century and twenty-first-century health information to determine what has evolved for the better or worse and what has remained consistent.

Objectives

• Compare the state of health information from the 19th-century cholera epidemic to the COVID-19 pandemic to enlighten attendees about the recurring themes and similarities.
• Provide an explanation and rationale for why studying health histories is important for improving the state of health information in the present.

When the Surgeon General declared misinformation a public health crisis in 2021, he specifically called on health professionals and healthcare organizations to engage with both patients and the public as well as to use technology and media platforms to share accurate health information with the public. However, most medical professionals are not trained in the nuances of fighting medical misinformation or utilizing social media or technology platforms to address medical misinformation with their patients and communities.

Our presentation will describe the successful model utilized by IMPACT (Illinois Medical Professionals Action Collaborative Team), a 501(c)3 non-profit that is a coalition of health professionals that work to amplify health professionals voices and disseminate evidence-based information to combat misinformation and medical mistrust. IMPACT was formed organically in March 2020 by seven diverse physicians all active on social media. Following its inception, IMPACT strategically recruited members with expertise that the organization needed and established a social media presence on multiple platforms (Twitter, Instragram, Facebook, etc.). Through social media, IMPACT crowdsourced information from the community and other healthcare professionals to quickly identify concerns, questions, new misinformation, and has allowed IMPACT to help guide the narrative on truthful messaging and evidence-based recommendations. Furthermore, IMPACT has utilized novel collaborations and partnerships with other organizations and grassroot coalitions with aligned missions to facilitate rapid communication and consistent messaging, and to build a large network of trusted and credible resources. The organization has also partnered with leaders in the community as trusted messengers to further disseminate evidence based messaging across communities.

The IMPACT model has empowered health professionals to debunk health misinformation and overcome common challenges involved with engaging on social media. The IMPACT’s information dissemination model has also expanded beyond social media to traditional news media both at the local and national outlets. IMPACT’s initiatives and strategies have also been highlighted in academic outlets such as The New England Journal of Medicine, Journal of Medical Internet Research, Journal of the American Pharmacists Association, and as a Chapter in Combating Health Misinformation Online: A Professional’s Guide to Helping the Public.

Objectives:

• Identify the different types of medical misinformation that exist and its recent rise on social media.
• Present the idea of health professionals as “trusted messengers” the explicit need for health professionals to combat misinformation.
• Describe a model for how health professionals can utilize social media to engage their communities and to combat health misinformation.

Patients and family caregivers turn online to meet their health information needs. Most people have large gaps in their understanding of health, conditions, procedures, and treatments. They often lack the information to ask good questions, or are embarrassed by what they don't know, intimidated to engage in a conversation with medical professionals, are scared to ask questions about topics like sex and bowel movements, and so they turn to the web. But we can proactively meet people's informational needs and concerns, so they both avoid online misinformation, and even when they do encounter it - have a more trusting relationship with their clinicians. Patient education platforms make it easy to find, create, and e-prescribe videos, animations, interactive decision aids, infographics, and documents that are easy to understand and act on. People can view them at home when there's not time pressure, and their families and care partners can get the same information. When these resources are co-designed and tested with patients they help patients understand and retain information, follow instructions, and normalize question asking - in fact, this type of eLearning platform can also make it easy for people to ask questions asynchronously. To combat misinformation, we need to proactively meet people's informational needs and address their concerns, worries, and questions so they don't turn to other sources.

Objectives:

• Learn how asynchronous patient education platforms are used to meet patient informational needs so they're less likely to go online in search of information
• Examine how e-prescribing information to patients and families builds trust and relationships to improve conversations and help patients feel more comfortable asking their "real" questions
• Discuss how this creates a feedback loop for care teams to better understand patient informational needs and continue to improve upon the resources they develop and update

Health literacy instruction often centers around fact-checking or debunking written materials. However, identifying misleading visualizations and imagery is a vital skill for navigating the current health information landscape. This interactive session will illustrate the pervasive nature of this issue and introduce attendees to a wide range of deceptive visual communications. Attendees will gain confidence in analyzing various types of visual information and be empowered to pass that knowledge along to their communities. We will share practical suggestions for incorporating these skills into programming in a variety of contexts.

Objectives:

• Recognize the importance of visual health information literacy.
• Identify misleading visual communication including manipulated, AI-generated, or out of context imagery.
• Incorporate visual health information literacy instruction into library and community programming.

Clinical research is essential for discovering new treatments and medical interventions that advance public health and medicine. To participate in clinical research studies, individuals voluntarily provide consent that is concordant with their personal values and intended to demonstrate that they understand and agree to be exposed to the potential risks and benefits of the proposed research. However, general understanding of medical and clinical research information is inadequate which is explained at least partly by the complexity of the information, coupled with low health literacy levels. Ensuring people can easily access accurate and relevant clinical research information is one way to help address health research misinformation. The MRCT Center Clinical Research Glossary is such a resource that can support research understanding, as a primary source of plain language research definitions, a tool to link to on social channels where misinformation might be spreading, and as a reference for trusted community figures and organizations to use and share in their outreach. While plain language cannot completely alleviate the problem of misinformation, it is a critical component of clear communication, especially around science and medicine. Further, messages that gain traction are often quite simple, so a resource to help disseminate accurate and understandable clinical research information could be helpful. In this presentation, the focus will first be on the important role of clinical research in healthcare and the necessity of using health literacy best practices in clinical care and clinical research environments. Next the MRCT Center's Clinical Research Glossary will be introduced as a freely available health literacy resource that can be used to engage with the public about clinical research participation and support research understanding. The session will include the rationale for the glossary's development, the process undertaken to pilot and expand it, and the potential benefits of its adoption by different user groups. Use cases will illustrate the glossary's uptake by organizations around the country, and especially address its potential within regional and national library systems as critical dissemination partners with connections to the communities they serve.

Objectives:
By the end of the session, attendees should be able to:

• Explain why clinical research is an important health-related topic that can benefit from tailored health literacy resources to support research understanding.
• Understand the potential benefits of using and sharing a plain language clinical research glossary.
• Consider approaches to integrating this plain language clinical research glossary into programs and processes.

This is 1 of 2 presentations for the Auditorium B. Presentations will be back to back with Q&A after the second presentation.

This session will provide an overview of a content analysis conducted on archived anti-vaccination websites, specifically describing how pre-existing antivaccination websites presented information about COVID-19. We will also address the use of Archive-It, a common web archiving tool, for capturing transient web information and misinformation for research purposes. The content analysis was conducted on a collection of 25 anti-vaccination websites established by the IvyPlus Web Collection Program prior to the pandemic and crawled every 6 months via Archive-It. Websites were assessed for antivaccination themes and misinformation techniques. The majority of websites addressed COVID-19 vaccines in a negative fashion, with more websites making appeals to personal freedom or expressing skepticism of science than questioning safety. Many sites appropriated standard web markers of legitimacy. We also assessed the strengths and limitations of using archived websites in the context of web and misinformation research. The archived versions of the websites had significant shortcomings, particularly in search functionality, and required supplementation with the live websites.

Objectives:

• Understanding nascent COVID-19 anti-vaccination behavior
• Understand how librarians and archivists can use Archive-It to capture and preserve online misinformation

This is 2 of 2 presentations for the Auditorium B. Presentations will be back-to-back with Q&A after the second presentation.

Distrust of the U.S. healthcare system by the general population in the United States remains high, leading to poor health outcomes and misinformation. In a 2006 study published in the Journal of General Internal Medicine, the amount of distrust is higher for those who lack health insurance coverage between the ages of 31-60 and reported poorer health. Since the early 1970s, health misinformation has increasingly been reported, reaching its first peak in 1995 and again in 2020, and it continues to grow.

To combat misinformation, the faculty librarians created health literacy courses to teach trainees how to find high-quality evidence in English and Spanish, rewrite scientific articles into plain-language summaries for public websites, and practice teach-back. The faculty librarians teach electives in the foundations of personal and organizational health literacy to train medical learners to search the evidence-based literature and author online plain-language summaries. It allows medical learners to read studies primarily funded by U.S. taxpayers, synthesize scientific discoveries, and write lay summaries for health consumers to read online. By incorporating elements of evidence-based medicine, these electives also reinforce the students' ability to appraise and summarize scientific studies critically and rapidly disseminate knowledge to provide synthesized information from peer-reviewed and authoritative sources.

Most learners need help writing plain-language summaries. The electives bring to light how to communicate as clearly and simply as possible to improve the general population's understanding of science, improve outcomes for eliminating health disparities, participate in a clinical trial, and justify spending on research. Furthermore, teaching students to get in the habit of writing plain-language summaries of their research helps reduce misinformation for papers published in Open Access journals. Finally, providing opportunities to practice health literacy supports the longitudinal learning of the trainee actively involved in the community healthcare setting as part of their clinical training. Health misinformation harms the welfare of our citizens, as some already find recognized authorities untrustworthy and choose not to accept scientific discovery and sound medical knowledge from these sources. In addition, it may only sometimes be possible to change a patient's opinion during face-to-face care.

Yet, another approach is authoring online sources of information that consumers use to look up medical conditions. Training future doctors on how to write plain-language summaries of published studies and their research, plus where to deposit content on public sites that consumers use, will assist in curbing health misinformation. Reference: Armstrong K, Rose A, Peters N, Long JA, McMurphy S, Shea JA. Distrust of the health care system and self-reported health in the United States. J Gen Intern Med. 2006 Apr;21(4):292-7. doi: 10.1111/j.1525-1497.2006.00396.x.

Objectives:

• Demonstrate the benefits of writing plain language summaries when communicating medical information.
• Demonstrate how medical trainees can be taught how to apply health literacy concepts to combat misinformation.

This is 1 of 2 presentations for the Auditorium C. Presentations will be back-to-back with Q&A after the second presentation.

Presentation will describe an interprofessionally-developed “Fighting Misinformation in Healthcare” workshop for new first-year medical students to build and practice skills for combating misinformation. This course session, embedded in two weeks of new student orientation and training, included instruction on types of misinformation, resources for finding evidence-based information, and tips for communicating information clearly informed by health literacy principles. The student experience culminated in a small group activity and competition to create informational media about healthcare topics around which there are significant myths and misinformation. Students were provided with a four-question framework for lifelong reflection on their own knowledge and a rubric addressing evidence, target audience, delivery, creativity/formatting, and relevance for evaluating their informational products. The workshop was developed by an interprofessional team comprising the Senior Director of Experiential Learning (MD), Medical Library Director, and Dean of the College of Public Health, with additional medical librarians for small group activity support.

Objectives:

• Describe an interprofessionally-developed course session on fighting misinformation delivered to first-year medical students at Quillen College of Medicine, encouraging collaboration between librarians and health science educators.
• Share approaches, concepts, rubrics, and other materialsdeveloped for the workshop.
• Reflect on lessons learned in the development and delivery of this newly developed and required session.

This is 2 of 2 presentations for the Auditorium C. Presentations will be back-to-back with Q&A after the second presentation.

Online misinformation continues to have adverse consequences for society. Inoculation theory has been put forward as a way to reduce susceptibility to misinformation by informing people about how they might be misinformed, but its scalability has been elusive both at a theoretical level and a practical level. We present the results of a recent study in Science Advances, for which we developed five short videos that inoculate people against manipulation techniques commonly used in misinformation: emotionally manipulative language, incoherence, false dichotomies, scapegoating, and ad hominem attacks. In seven preregistered studies, i.e., six randomized controlled studies (n = 6464) and an ecologically valid field study on YouTube (n = 22,632), we find that these videos improve manipulation technique recognition, boost confidence in spotting these techniques, increase people’s ability to discern trustworthy from untrustworthy content, and improve the quality of their sharing decisions. These effects are robust across the political spectrum and a wide variety of covariates. We show that psychological inoculation campaigns on social media are effective at improving misinformation resilience at scale.

Objectives

• Present the results of our recent publication in Science Advances (doi: 10.1126/sciadv.abo6254) about how to "inoculate" social media users against misinformation
• Discuss the evidence behind anti-misinformation interventions and their efficacy
• Discuss potential pathways forward for combating misinformation online.

Misinformation has been a risk factor throughout the pandemic, leading to more disease and death from COVID-19. Dr. Katrine Wallace (UIC School of Public Health) is an epidemiologist and social media science communicator who debunks misinformation and false claims about COVID-19 and the vaccines. In this webinar, Dr. Wallace will explain the difference between misinformation vs disinformation, discuss why disinformation is such a widespread public health issue, and identify strategies to combat health misinformation among your own friends/family/workplace/community.

Objectives:

• Review misinformation vs disinformation
• Explain why disinformation is a widespread public health issue
• Learn strategies to combat health misinformation on the following levels: • Individual level • Interpersonal level • Organizational level • Policy level

Our presentation will describe a curriculum we developed, with support from our librarians, to train health professionals to evaluate online resources, improve their scientific communication skills, and confidently address health misinformation with their patients and in their communities. This curriculum provided skills for evaluating online resources, coupled with workshops on the science of storytelling techniques, to coach health professionals to identify misinformation in their community and use evidence-based strategies from climate scientists to share facts and narratives to counter them. A medical student elective was offered in 2021 and 2022. Through an Association of American Medical Colleges grant from the CDC, we were selected to adapt this curriculum for nurses and pharmacists.

Objectives: The purpose of our presentation is to show that:

• Collaboration with librarians should be an integral component of educational programs to address misinformation, as librarians can provide their expertise on evaluating online resources.
• Even a short curriculum on misinformation can be successful with increasing health professionals’ confidence identifying misinformation and using evidence-based approaches to address misinformation.