Quality, reliability and misinformation in mental health and neurodivergence content on social media: a systematic review

Social media is increasingly used for health information seeking, yet no systematic review has assessed the quality of mental health or neurodivergence-related information on social media. This systematic review aimed to assess the quality, reliability, and prevalence of misinformation in such content, comparing findings across platforms and topics. Searches were performed in MEDLINE Ultimate, APA PsycINFO, CINAHL, and Scopus. Studies were eligible if they evaluated the accuracy, quality, or reliability of mental health or neurodivergent-related information on social media platforms. Twenty-seven studies met the inclusion criteria and were critically appraised using a bespoke tool assessing the search, evaluation, and methodological quality. Due to heterogeneity, the findings were synthesized narratively. Across the 27 included studies, 5057 social media posts were analysed. Misinformation prevalence ranged from 0% to 56.9% and was higher on TikTok than YouTube, and neurodivergence-related content showed higher misinformation prevalence than mental health topics. Information quality and reliability varied widely but were generally higher for professionally created content. These findings highlight a clear need for action: mental health and neurodivergence organizations should create and share accurate, evidence-based content to counter misinformation, and clinicians should be supported to do the same. There is a need for strengthened content moderation, as well as consistent definitions and measures of mental health misinformation. Addressing these issues is vital to protect public mental health and improve the reliability of online information.