{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.029141506957206617, 'fraction_numerical': 0.03281701233919664, 'mean_word_length': 5.446700507614213, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Science in the Spotlight: A Crisis of Confidence?

With coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) raging around the globe, humanity has perhaps never had such an urgent need for scientific intervention. Yet at the same time, the pandemic has highlighted a widespread mistrust for scientific advice in populations across the world. In the United States, recent antiscience political agendas have appeared to increase this lack of trust, sometimes to the point of open hostility. Scientists and scientific institutions are being sidelined as key political decisions are made with little consideration of the underlying evidence (Editorial... 2020). There have been concerns about low levels of public trust in science for many years (Kabat 2017). In 2018, the Wellcome Trust carried out the first worldwide study, the Wellcome Global Monitor 2018, in which 140,000 people (≥15 y of age) were surveyed in 140 countries to determine, among other things, levels of public trust in science (Wellcome Trust 2019). Only 18% of people worldwide reported a “high” level of trust in science, with around half (54%) having “medium” and 14% with a “low” level of trust in science; 13% did not respond to the question (Wellcome Trust 2019; Figure). The variability detected among different countries was correlated with country income levels, with “low” income countries having less trust in scientists than “high” income countries. Other factors significantly associated with trust in scientists include past science education, confidence in national government and its institutions, place of residence (urban/rural), adequacy of household income, income inequality, and access to electronic communication technologies (Wellcome Trust 2019). Based on results of a limited number of studies carried out prior to the COVID-19 pandemic and early after the pandemic arose, it appears that confidence in the US scientific community has remained relatively stable (National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine 2019; Agley 2020; Funk and Kennedy 2020). Unfortunately, we were unable to find more recent published reports on changes in the public’s trust in science since COVID-19 has become widespread and political pressure more intense. Regardless of the impact of COVID19, it is clear that there is considerable skepticism of scientific evidence. One issue is that science rarely produces clear answers, and constructive criticism and debate are at the very heart of the scientific process. However, the scope for questioning the scientific method can be subverted in attempts to undermine scientific consensus without strong evidence to the contrary. This is perhaps most clearly seen with the controversy surrounding vaccines, in which a nowinfamous article published in the Lancet by Andrew Wakefield in 1998 that linked the measles, mumps, and rubella vaccine with autism triggered a powerful antivaccination campaign that remains strong even though the original data were shown to be fraudulent (Suelzer et al. 2019; Research!America 2020). Despite a clear consensus within the scientific community that vaccination and autism are not linked, antivaccination groups maintain the public perception that this topic is currently unresolved. Confusion and misunderstanding about this and many other key scientific questions only further the public mistrust of science (Kabat 2017). For example, in a 2014 US survey, Funk and Raine (2015) found that the public did not believe that scientists had reached a consensus on the health effects of genetically modified crops, despite the fact that ~1,500 peerreviewed studies demonstrated no differences between genetically modified and traditionally grown crops on the JCTXXX10.1177/2380084420976358JDR Clinical & Translational ResearchScience in the Spotlight editorial2020