Buy this Article for $10.95

Have a coupon or promotional code? Enter it here:

When you buy this you'll get access to the ePub version, a downloadable PDF, and the ability to print the full article.


  1. Buller, David B. PhD
  2. Pagoto, Sherry PhD
  3. Walkosz, Barbara J. PhD
  4. Woodall, W. Gill PhD
  5. Berteletti, Julia MSW
  6. Kinsey, Alishia BA
  7. Henry, Kimberly PhD
  8. DiVito, Joseph BA


Misinformation can undermine public health recommendations. Our team evaluated a 9-week social media campaign promoting COVID-19 prevention to mothers (n = 303) of teen daughters in January-March 2021. We implemented an epidemiological model for monitoring, diagnosing, and responding quickly to misinformation from mothers. Overall, 54 comments out of 1617 total comments (3.3%) from 20 mothers (6.6% of sample) contained misinformation. Misinformation was presented in direct statements and indirectly as hypothetical questions, source derogation, and personal stories, and attributed to others. Misinformation occurred most (n = 40; 74%) in comments on vaccination posts. The community manager responded to 48 (89%) misinformation comments by acknowledging the comment and rebutting misinformation. No mothers who provided misinformation left the Facebook groups and a few commented again (n = 10) or reacted (n = 3) to responses. Only a small number of comments conveyed misinformation. Our quick-response epidemiological protocol appeared to prevent debate and dropout and exposed these mothers to credible information.