Dolor y desinformación en redes sociales: representaciones digitales, amplificación y validación social en la comunicación en salud (2021–2025)
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.65598/rps.6178Palavras-chave:
pain communication, health misinformation, social networks, social validation, narrative representationResumo
Antecedentes: La desinformación sobre dolor circula en redes sociales, pero se conoce poco sobre cómo las formas narrativas, el entorno sociotécnico de plataforma (proxy) y las señales comunitarias se asocian con su presencia y circulación. Faltan análisis comparativos que integren representación, credibilidad, validación social y engagement. Este estudio analiza cómo se representan digitalmente las experiencias de dolor en redes sociales y cómo dichas representaciones se asocian con la presencia de desinformación, la amplificación del contenido, los marcadores de credibilidad y la validación social del testimonio.
Métodos: Se analizaron 550 publicaciones públicas sobre dolor (110 por plataforma; ≥50 comentarios) en Facebook, Instagram, TikTok, X y YouTube (2021–2025). Se codificaron forma narrativa, marcadores de credibilidad, validación social y engagement. Se estimaron ORa mediante regresión logística multivariable (VCE robusta), probabilidades predichas y curvas ROC. Una submuestra cualitativa (N=300) permitió análisis temático complementario.
Resultados: La prevalencia global de desinformación fue 17,27% (95/550). En el modelo principal, Espectáculo se asoció con mayores odds de desinformación (ORa 11,03; IC95% 3,50–34,80) y Testimonio con menores odds (ORa 0,17; 0,04–0,75). Instagram presentó la mayor probabilidad ajustada (Pr=0,3945) y YouTube la más baja (Pr=0,0238). La amplificación se asoció positivamente con desinformación (engagement_log_z: ORa 1,79; 1,28–2,52) y el engagement_raw mediano fue 35.159 vs 4.993 en publicaciones sin desinformación. En análisis extendidos, la validación social empática mostró un gradiente protector (V5 vs V1: ORa 0,0500; 0,0165–0,1515) y la identidad profesional declarada se asoció con menor riesgo (ORa 0,36; 0,19–0,70). El modelo mostró AUC=0,884 (IC95% 0,806–0,905).
Conclusiones: La desinformación sobre dolor se asoció con encuadres narrativos específicos y con heterogeneidad por plataforma, y aumentó con la amplificación. La identidad profesional declarada y la validación social empática se asociaron inversamente con desinformación en modelos extendidos. Los hallazgos orientan intervenciones plataforma-específicas de mitigación, alfabetización digital y diseño de mensajes centradas en encuadre, trazabilidad y seguridad clínica.
Downloads
Referências
Adler, H., Lewis, M., Ng, C. H. M., Brooks, C., Leonardi, M., Mikocka-Walus, A., Bush, D., Semprini, A., Wilkinson-Tomey, J., Condous, G., Patravali, N., Abbott, J., & Armour, M. (2024). Social media, endometriosis, and evidence-based information: An analysis of Instagram content. Healthcare, 12(1), 121. https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare12010121
Allcott, H., & Gentzkow, M. (2017). Social media and fake news in the 2016 election. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 31(2), 211–236. https://doi.org/10.1257/jep.31.2.211
Basch, C. H., Donelle, L., Fera, J., & Jaime, C. (2022). Deconstructing TikTok videos on mental health: Cross-sectional, descriptive content analysis. JMIR Formative Research, 6(5), e38340. https://doi.org/10.2196/38340
Basch, C. H., Meleo-Erwin, Z., Fera, J., Jaime, C., & Basch, C. E. (2021). A global pandemic in the time of viral memes: COVID-19 vaccine misinformation on TikTok. Human Vaccines & Immunotherapeutics, 17(8), 2373–2377. https://doi.org/10.1080/21645515.2021.1894896
Blease, C., Carel, H., & Geraghty, K. (2017). Epistemic injustice in healthcare encounters: Evidence from chronic fatigue syndrome. Journal of Medical Ethics, 43(8), 549–557. https://doi.org/10.1136/medethics-2016-103691
Brennen, J. S., Simon, F. M., Howard, P. N., & Nielsen, R. K. (2020, April 7). Types, sources, and claims of COVID-19 misinformation (RISJ Factsheet). Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism. https://reutersinstitute.politics.ox.ac.uk/types-sources-and-claims-covid-19-misinformation
Calleja, N., AbdAllah, A., Abad, N., Ahmed, N., Albarracín, D., Altieri, E., Anoko, J. N., Arcos, R., Azlan, A. A., Bayer, J., Bechmann, A., Bezbaruah, S., Briand, S. C., Brooks, I., Bucci, L. M., Burzo, S., Czerniak, C., De Domenico, M., Dunn, A. G., ... Purnat, T. D. (2021). A public health research agenda for managing infodemics: Methods and results of the first WHO infodemiology conference. JMIR Infodemiology, 1(1), e30979. https://doi.org/10.2196/30979
Charon, R. (2006). Narrative medicine: Honoring the stories of illness. Oxford University Press.
Cinelli, M., Quattrociocchi, W., Galeazzi, A., Valensise, C. M., Brugnoli, E., Schmidt, A. L., Zola, P., Zollo, F., & Scala, A. (2020). The COVID-19 social media infodemic. Scientific Reports, 10(1), 16598. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-73510-5
D’Agostino, E. M., Ehrhart, M. G., & Widrick, R. (2022). Content analysis of TikTok videos about chronic musculoskeletal pain. Pain Medicine, 23(10), 1672–1680. https://doi.org/10.1093/pm/pnac011
Eysenbach, G. (2020). How to fight an infodemic: The four pillars of infodemic management. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 22(6), e21820. https://doi.org/10.2196/21820
Frank, A. W. (1995). The wounded storyteller: Body, illness, and ethics. University of Chicago Press.
Franzke, A. S., Bechmann, A., Ess, C. M., & Zimmer, M. (Eds.). (2020). Internet research: Ethical guidelines 3.0. AoIR (The International Association of Internet Researchers). https://aoir.org/reports/ethics3.pdf
Gallotti, R., Valle, F., Castaldo, N., Sacco, P., & De Domenico, M. (2020). Assessing the risks of “infodemics” in response to COVID-19 epidemics. Nature Human Behaviour, 4(12), 1285–1293. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-020-00994-6
Gillespie, T. (2018). Custodians of the Internet: Platforms, content moderation, and the hidden decisions that shape social media. Yale University Press.
Goudman, L., De Smedt, A., Noppen, M., Moens, M., Demeyer, H., & Lenoir, D. (2022). “I am in pain”: Analysis of biomedical pain-related content and quality of information on Instagram. Journal of Pain Research, 15, 1913–1925. https://doi.org/10.2147/JPR.S359009
Hwang, D. Y., Wang, Y., Smith, I. A., Danler, J., Su, R., Ward, M., ... Kress, J. P. (2025). Physician–patient communication and discordance in chronic pain decision-making: A systematic review. Pain Medicine, 26(6), 649–661. https://doi.org/10.1093/pm/pnaf089
International Association for the Study of Pain. (2020, July 14). IASP announces revised definition of pain. https://www.iasp-pain.org/resources/iasp-news/iasp-announces-revised-definition-of-pain/
Islam, M. S., Sarkar, T., Khan, S. H., Mostofa Kamal, A.-H., Hasan, S. M. M., Kabir, A., ... Seale, H. (2020). COVID-19-related infodemic and its impact on public health: A global social media analysis. Social Network Analysis and Mining, 10, 82.
Javadi, A. H., Costa, A., & Jannini, T. B. (2023). Digital health misinformation: A systematic review of social media content and interventions. International Journal of Medical Informatics, 172, 105024.
Lazer, D. M. J., Baum, M. A., Benkler, Y., Berinsky, A. J., Greenhill, K. M., Metzger, M. J., Nyhan, B., Pennycook, G., Rothschild, D., Schudson, M., Sloman, S. A., Sunstein, C. R., Thorson, E. A., Watts, D. J., & Zittrain, J. L. (2018). The science of fake news. Science, 359(6380), 1094–1096. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aao2998
Lewandowsky, S., Cook, J., Schmid, P., Holford, D. L., Finn, A., Leask, J., Thomson, A., Lombardi, D., Al-Rawi, A. K., Amazeen, M. A., Anderson, E. C., Armaos, K. D., Betsch, C., Bruns, H. H. B., Ecker, U. K. H., Gavaruzzi, T., Hahn, U., Herzog, S., Juanchich, M., ... Vraga, E. K. (2021). The COVID-19 vaccine communication handbook: A practical guide for improving vaccine communication and fighting misinformation. https://sks.to/c19vax
Lin, Y., Li, Y., & Zhang, Z. (2016). Understanding credibility and trust in online health information: A meta-analysis. Health Communication, 31(3), 341–356.
Loomba, S., de Figueiredo, A., Piatek, S. J., de Graaf, K., & Larson, H. J. (2021). Measuring the impact of COVID-19 vaccine misinformation on vaccination intent in the UK and USA. Nature Human Behaviour, 5(3), 337–348. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-021-01056-1
Melzack, R., & Wall, P. D. (1965). Pain mechanisms: A new theory. Science, 150(3699), 971–979. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.150.3699.971
Merolli, M., Gray, K., & Martin-Sanchez, F. (2015). Health outcomes and related effects of using social media in chronic disease management: A literature review and analysis of affordances. Journal of Biomedical Informatics, 46(6), 957–969. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbi.2013.04.010
Metzger, M. J., & Flanagin, A. J. (2013). Credibility and trust of information in online environments: The use of cognitive heuristics. Journal of Pragmatics, 59, 210–220. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2013.07.012
Nunes, J., Silva, A., Rodrigues, F., & Lima, R. (2021). Pain on TikTok: A content analysis of chronic pain narratives. Pain Management Nursing, 22(4), 1–12.
O’Connor, C., & Weatherall, J. O. (2019). The misinformation age: How false beliefs spread. Yale University Press.
Papadamou, K., Zannettou, S., Blackburn, J., De Cristofaro, E., Stringhini, G., & Sirivianos, M. (2022). It is just a flu: Assessing the magnitude of COVID-19 misinformation on YouTube. Proceedings of the International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media, 16(1), 254–265. https://doi.org/10.1609/icwsm.v16i1.19329
Raja, S. N., Carr, D. B., Cohen, M., Finnerup, N. B., Flor, H., Gibson, S., ... Vader, K. (2020). The revised International Association for the Study of Pain definition of pain: Concepts, challenges, and compromises. Pain, 161(9), 1976–1982. https://doi.org/10.1097/j.pain.0000000000001939
Rogers, C. (1961). On becoming a person: A therapist’s view of psychotherapy. Houghton Mifflin.
Roter, D., & Hall, J. (2006). Doctors talking with patients/patients talking with doctors: Improving communication in medical visits. Praeger.
Shu, K., Sliva, A., Wang, S., Tang, J., & Liu, H. (2017). Fake news detection on social media: A data mining perspective. ACM SIGKDD Explorations Newsletter, 19(1), 22–36. https://doi.org/10.1145/3137597.3137600
Suárez-Lledó, V., & Álvarez-Gálvez, J. (2021). Prevalence of health misinformation on social media: Systematic review. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 23(1), e17187. https://doi.org/10.2196/17187
Sundar, S. S. (2008). The MAIN model: A heuristic approach to understanding technology effects on credibility. In M. J. Metzger & A. J. Flanagin (Eds.), Digital media, youth, and credibility (pp. 73–100). The MIT Press.
Tangcharoensathien, V., Calleja, N., Nguyen, T., Purnat, T., D’Agostino, M., Garcia-Saiso, S., ... Briand, S. (2020). Framework for managing the COVID-19 infodemic: Methods and results of an online, crowdsourced WHO technical consultation. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 22(6), e19659. https://doi.org/10.2196/19659
Topol, E. (2019). Deep medicine: How artificial intelligence can make healthcare human again. Basic Books.
Turk, D. C., & Okifuji, A. (2002). Psychological factors in chronic pain: Evolution and revolution. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 70(3), 678–690. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-006X.70.3.678
Vosoughi, S., Roy, D., & Aral, S. (2018). The spread of true and false news online. Science, 359(6380), 1146–1151. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aap9559
Vraga, E. K., & Bode, L. (2020). Defining misinformation and understanding its bounded nature. Political Communication, 37(1), 136–144. https://doi.org/10.1080/10584609.2019.1678892
Vraga, E. K., Tully, M., Kotcher, J. E., Smithson, A.-B., & Broeckelman-Post, M. (2020). Theorizing news literacy behaviors. Communication Theory, 0, 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1093/ct/qtaa005
Wardle, C., & Derakhshan, H. (2017, September 27). Information disorder: Toward an interdisciplinary framework for research and policy making (Council of Europe report No. DGI(2017)09; Ref. 162317GBR). Council of Europe. https://edoc.coe.int/en/media/7495-information-disorder-toward-an-interdisciplinary-framework-for-research-and-policy-making.html
Waszak, P. M., Kasprzycka-Waszak, W., & Kubanek, A. (2018). The spread of medical fake news in social media-The pilot quantitative study. Health Policy and Technology, 7(2), 115–118. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hlpt.2018.03.002
World Health Organization. (2020, September 23). Managing the COVID-19 infodemic: Promoting healthy behaviours and mitigating the harm from misinformation and disinformation. https://www.who.int/news/item/23-09-2020-managing-the-covid-19-infodemic-promoting-healthy-behaviours-and-mitigating-the-harm-from-misinformation-and-disinformation
World Health Organization. (2021). An overview of infodemic management during COVID-19, January 2020–May 2021. https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789240035966
World Medical Association. (2024). WMA Declaration of Helsinki-Ethical principles for medical research involving human participants. https://www.wma.net/policies-post/wma-declaration-of-helsinki/
Yalamanchili, B., & Basch, C. H. (2023). Quality of pain-related information on YouTube: A content analysis. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 25, e43210. https://doi.org/10.2196/43210
Yeung, A. W. K., Tosevska, A., Klager, E., Eibensteiner, F., Tsagkaris, C., Parvanov, E. D., Nawaz, F. A., Völkl-Kernstock, S., Schaden, E., Kletecka-Pulker, M., Willschke, H., & Atanasov, A. G. (2022). Medical and health-related misinformation on social media: Bibliometric study of the scientific literature. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 24(1), e28152. https://doi.org/10.2196/28152
Zheluk, A., Anderson, J., & Dineen-Griffin, S. (2022). Analysis of acute non-specific back pain content on TikTok: An exploratory study. Cureus, 14(1), e21404. https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.21404
Downloads
Publicado
Como Citar
Edição
Secção
Licença
Direitos de Autor (c) 2026 Os autores mantêm os direitos autorais e cedem à revista o direito de primeira publicação e o direito de edição.
Este trabalho encontra-se publicado com a Licença Internacional Creative Commons Atribuição-NãoComercial-SemDerivações 4.0.
Os(As) autores(as) que publicam nesta Revista aceitam as seguintes condições:
- Os(As) autores(as) conservam os direitos autorais.
- Os(As) autores(as) cedem à Revista o direito da primeira publicação e os direitos de edição.
- Todo o conteúdo é regulado por uma Licença Atribuição/Reconhecimento-SemDerivações 4.0 Internacional. Consulte a versão informativa e o texto legal. Isso permite que terceiros utilizem o publicado desde que mencionem a autoria e a primeira publicação nesta Revista. Se o material for transformado, o trabalho modificado não poderá ser distribuído.
- Os(As) autores(as) podem realizar outros acordos contratuais adicionais para a distribuição não exclusiva da versão publicada (ex.: repositório institucional ou livro), desde que indiquem a publicação original nesta Revista.
- Recomenda-se que os(as) autores(as) publiquem seu trabalho na internet (páginas institucionais ou pessoais) após a publicação oficial, citando a Revista para aumentar a difusão (veja The Effect of Open Access).
