Abstract
Objectives To investigate how the relationship between vitamin D and COVID-19 has been presented in traditional media sources (UK newspapers) and assess the level of misinformation associated with this issue by comparing newspaper article content to the evidence-based guidelines.
Design Qualitative study
Setting Data were collected over the first year of the pandemic (February 2019-20), from the five most widely read UK based newspapers by searching the Nexis database using keywords “vitamin D” and “COVID”. An inductive thematic analysis was carried out on the data to identify themes and subthemes. Quality control of the coding was conducted on a sample of the dataset (20%). Data were also compared to the “ground truth” identified as the NICE report titled “COVID-19 rapid guideline: vitamin D” to explore the accuracy of media outputs.
Results The four main themes identified were ‘association of vitamin D with COVID-19’, ‘politically informed views’, ‘vitamin D deficiency’ and ‘vitamin D sources’. When compared to the ground truth, most of the information from newspaper articles relating to the key findings was ‘correct’ for each of the findings, except for COVID-19 infection.
Conclusions Although most of the information included in newspaper articles concerning the relationship of vitamin D with COVID-19 was ‘correct’, this study highlighted that there was still a notable amount of ‘incorrect’ information published. In the context of COVID-19, it is imperative that media outputs are accurate and inform the public and front-line health professionals as correct information is a key factor in disease prevention. Future research should focus on the accuracy of media outputs to further investigate health misinformation as an issue in traditional media and how that may affect public health. Attempts should be made to improve journalistic integrity through more rigorous and standardised regulations enforced across all media outlets so that public knowledge on current events is based on evidence rather than conjecture.
Data sharing statement: We are happy to share any data if/when asked.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This study did not receive any funding
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Footnotes
↵* Alexandra Mavroeidi and Ryan Innes are joined first authors
ryan.innes{at}strath.ac.uk
esperanza.miyake{at}strath.ac.uk
diane.pennington{at}strath.ac.uk
Competing Interests declaration None
Transparency statement The lead and last author (the manuscript’s guarantors) affirm that the manuscript is an honest, accurate, and transparent account of the study being reported; that no important aspects of the study have been omitted; and that any discrepancies from the study as planned (and, if relevant, registered) have been explained.
Ethics approval Ethical approval was obtained through the Strathclyde University Computer and Information Sciences Ethics Committee on 1/2/2021 (ID: 1303).
Footnotes We would like to thank William Hodgson for helping with the quality control of the coding.
Funding None
Dissemination to participants and related patient and public communities:
Paper in collection COVID-19 SARS-CoV-2 preprints from medRxiv and bioRxiv
Paper in collection COVID-19 SARS-CoV-2 preprints from medRxiv and bioRxiv
The Chan Zuckerberg Initiative, Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, the Sergey Brin Family Foundation, California Institute of Technology, Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Imperial College London, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Stanford University, The University of Edinburgh, University of Washington, and Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam.
Subject Area
Reviews and Context
0
Comment
0
TRIP Peer Reviews
0
Community Reviews
0
Automated Services
1
Blogs/Media
Author Videos