Mohammed M Aldurdunji
5 min
Abstract
Background: Digital health misinformation on social media and emerging AI platforms poses a growing challenge for healthcare systems.Community pharmacists are often the first point of contact for patients influenced by online health content, yet limited evidence exists from Saudi Arabia, where social media engagement is among the highest globally.Objective: To examine how community pharmacists in Saudi Arabia experience digital health misinformation, including its sources, patient impacts, confidence in addressing misinformation, and training needs.Methods: A descriptive cross-sectional online survey was conducted among licensed community pharmacists in Saudi Arabia between March and April 2025.Using a convenience-plus-snowball sampling strategy, A total of 768 completed survey responses from licensed community pharmacists were included in the analysis.These responses were obtained through an anonymous, nationally distributed electronic questionnaire.The survey explored exposure to misinformation, pharmacists' confidence, and preferred training modalities.Descriptive statistics and regression analyses were used to identify predictors of key outcomes.Results: Most pharmacists (89.6%) reported encountering patient-derived digital health misinformation, with 51.6% experiencing such encounters weekly or daily.Facebook (39.3%) and WhatsApp (27.7%) were identified as the most common sources, while 10% of encounters involved AI-generated content.Common misinformation themes included supplement misuse (27.1%) and concerns about medication safety (25.7%).Only 34.5% of pharmacists felt confident in identifying or correcting misinformation.Age, years of experience, and frequency of exposure were significantly associated with higher confidence and with perceived patient-behaviour impact.More than half (59.5%) supported formal training in misinformation management.Conclusions: Digital misinformation is now a routine component of community pharmacy practice in Saudi Arabia and has tangible implications for patient behaviour and medication safety.Although confidence in managing misinformation was low, digitally active community pharmacists expressed strong readiness for targeted training.These findings underscore the need for structured educational initiatives and coordinated policy responses to strengthen digital health literacy and misinformation management within pharmacy practice.
Alex: Double the odds from experience alone points to on-the-job learning filling gaps formal training misses.
Sam: For confidence in spotting and fixing it, nearly half felt neutral, with just under a third saying they were sure enough to act. They often checked official sites or searched online themselves, but top hurdles were lack of training and fuzzy rules.
Alex: What tipped the scales for those who did feel ready?
Sam: Experience over ten years doubled the chance of feeling prepared compared to new grads. Frequent run-ins built assurance too, and any formal training cut odds of low confidence by about half.
Alex: Hands-on trumps theory here. And they asked about fixes like more classes?
Sam: Over half backed formal training on spotting fakes and digital smarts, with nearly as many wanting workshops. Most supported tougher rules on bad info, and over a third saw pharmacists leading public talks.
Alex: Does the paper caution anything about these patterns?
Sam: It does—being a one-time poll of digitally active pharmacists via shares and networks, it might miss less-online folks, so not fully representative. Self-reports could skew from memory or wanting to sound good, and it can't prove causes. Still, it spotlights education and policy fixes.
Alex: Fair limits to keep in mind. So overall, pharmacists see themselves ready to step up with the right support.
Sam: Precisely. The study positions them to tackle this through evidence-based talks, teaching patients better, and teaming up with health care pros. It spotlights priorities like skills to judge online sources, manage info overload, and communicate during tough chats. The needed know-how is digital health literacy: judging online info, handling algorithm-picked content, and guiding patients—like spotting fake news the way you'd double-check a friend's wild story.
Alex: So it's a full toolkit for navigating the online mess and guiding patients back to safe choices.
Sam: Yes, and while the snapshot gives a solid baseline, the non-random sample means it might overstate issues. Self-reports add uncertainty—no direct proof of patient behaviors. Still, it flags real needs, urging steps like tested training programs.
Alex: That's a grounded takeaway—thanks, Sam, for breaking it down. And to listeners, thanks for joining us on ResearchPod for this look at pharmacists navigating online health confusion.