Effects of fact-checking social media vaccine misinformation on attitudes toward vaccines

Factors Influencing the Intention of Chinese Adults to Recommend COVID-19 Vaccination for Specific or Non-Specific Groups

The widespread availability of vaccines has profound implications for sustainable public health. Positive recommendation on vaccination is one of the most effective ways to increase the willingness to vaccinate against COVID-19. This study aims to investigate the factors influencing the intentions to recommend COVID-19 vaccination for specific groups (IRCVSG) and the intentions to recommend COVID-19 vaccination for non-specific groups (IRCVNSG) in China and explore the mediating role of vaccine hesitancy and perception of vaccination information. This study conducted a cross-sectional anonymous online survey of adults (N = 903) in 28 provincial-level administrative regions in China in May 2022. The prevalence of IRCVSG and IRCVNSG was 60.5% and 93.0%, respectively. Health information literacy has a significant direct and indirect impact on IRCVSG through safety hesitancy and the perceived adequacy and usefulness of vaccination information. The relationship between health information literacy and IRCVNSG is entirely mediated via hesitation about the effectiveness and perceived usefulness of vaccination information. Special attention should be paid to the safety hesitation of COVID-19 vaccination for specific groups. This study tests these effects from both theoretical and practical perspectives, helping to address barriers to promoting the vaccination of specific groups for COVID-19 in clinical practice, improving health and sustainability.

A Cross-Sectional Analysis of Community Perceptions of Flu and COVID-19 Vaccines at Turtle Creek Primary Care Center

BACKGROUND

Influenza (flu) and COVID-19 vaccination rates are subpar across the US, especially in racial and/or socioeconomic minority groups who are understudied in public health literature.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this mixed-methods study was to elucidate attitudes of patients at the Turtle Creek Primary Care Center, a clinic that cares for ∼70% non-white patients, towards flu and COVID-19 vaccines, with the goal of establishing vaccine education gaps and increasing vaccine uptake in minority communities.

DESIGN/PATIENTS

This study was conducted as a cross-sectional analysis. Authors completed 123 patient phone surveys of patients cared for at the Turtle Creek clinic inquiring about flu and COVID-19 infection status and vaccination uptake (August 26-October 10, 2021).

APPROACH/KEY RESULTS

We found that rates of vaccination were subpar in the Turtle Creek community, with only 54% having received the COVID-19 vaccine and only 44% receiving the flu vaccine regularly. There was a strong association between COVID-19 and flu vaccine acceptance and a notable correlation between vaccine acceptance and age. When assessing how vaccine acceptance was influenced by trusted sources of information, those who cited trusting "medical professionals" and "word of mouth" had higher odds of COVID-19 vaccine acceptance but those who cited trusting "social media" had decreased odds of acceptance. Finally, we uncovered 14 common factors for either vaccine acceptance or refusal that clustered into four overarching themes of trust, need, safety, and availability.

CONCLUSION

These data highlight the necessity of improved vaccine education and reveal targetable populations and approaches for disseminating vaccine information.

Prominent misinformation interventions reduce misperceptions but increase scepticism

Current interventions to combat misinformation, including fact-checking, media literacy tips and media coverage of misinformation, may have unintended consequences for democracy. We propose that these interventions may increase scepticism towards all information, including accurate information. Across three online survey experiments in three diverse countries (the United States, Poland and Hong Kong; total n = 6,127), we tested the negative spillover effects of existing strategies and compared them with three alternative interventions against misinformation. We examined how exposure to fact-checking, media literacy tips and media coverage of misinformation affects individuals' perception of both factual and false information, as well as their trust in key democratic institutions. Our results show that while all interventions successfully reduce belief in false information, they also negatively impact the credibility of factual information. This highlights the need for further improved strategies that minimize the harms and maximize the benefits of interventions against misinformation.

COVID-19 vaccine acceptance among college students in South Carolina: do information sources and trust in information matter?

BACKGROUND

For college students who are exposed to multimedia, the sources of COVID-19 vaccine information and their trust in these sources may play a role in shaping the vaccine acceptance spectrum (refusal, hesitancy, and acceptance).

METHODS

Based on an online survey among 1,062 college students in South Carolina, we investigated vaccine information sources among college students and examined how COVID-19 vaccine acceptance was associated with information source and trust level in each source.

RESULTS

The top three sources of COVID-19 vaccine information were health agencies, mass media, and personal social networks. Trust in mass media, health agencies, scientists, and pharmaceutical companies was negatively associated with vaccine refusal. Trust in government and scientists was negatively associated with vaccine hesitancy.

DISCUSSION

Our findings highlight the importance of restoring trust in government, healthcare system, scientists, and pharmaceutical industries in the COVID-19 era.

"I Do Not Trust Health Information Shared by My Parents": Credibility Judgement of Health (Mis)information on Social Media in China

The surge of health misinformation on social media poses a threat to public health. This qualitative study reports how users process health misinformation from the dominant strong-tie social media, WeChat, in China. We conducted ten on-site focus groups involving 76 adult participants. Drawing on the apomediation theory and the dual processing model of credibility assessment, we found the heuristic approach to processing health information was the dominant route of engagement. We identified four categories of credibility assessment cues, including (1) expertise, authority, and commercial intent of original sources, (2) expertise of apomediaries (i.e. social media information sharers) and generational bias, (3) clickbait and sensational content versus objective scientific style, and (4) disconfirmation versus confirmation bias. We highlight that apomediaries are playing an increasingly important role in informing credibility judgment. Specifically, younger adults have formed a generational bias of deeming older apomediaries as cues of lower credibility.

Mitigating Health and Science Misinformation: A Scoping Review of Literature from 2017 to 2022

Literature on how to address misinformation has rapidly expanded in recent years. The aim of this scoping review was to synthesize the growing published literature on health and science misinformation mitigation interventions. English-language articles published from January 2017 to July 2022 were included. After title/abstract screening, 115 publications (148 empirical studies) met inclusion criteria and were coded for sample characteristics, topics, mitigation strategies, research methods, outcomes, and intervention efficacy. A marked increase in misinformation mitigation research was observed in 2020-2022. COVID-19, vaccines, and climate change were the most frequently addressed topics. Most studies used general population samples recruited online; few focused on populations most vulnerable to misinformation. Most studies assessed cognitive outcomes (e.g., knowledge), with fewer assessing health behavior, communication behavior, or skills. Correction (k = 97) was the most used misinformation mitigation strategy, followed by education and other literacy initiatives (k = 39) and prebunking/inoculation (k = 24). Intervention efficacy varied, with 76 studies reporting positive, 17 reporting null, and 68 reporting mixed results. Most misinformation mitigation interventions were limited to short-term online experiments focused on improving cognitive outcomes. Priority research areas going forward include expanding and diversifying study samples, scaling interventions, conducting longitudinal observations, and focusing on communities susceptible to misinformation.

Social Media as an Effective Provider of Quality-Assured and Accurate Information to Increase Vaccine Rates: Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Vaccination programs are instrumental in prolonging and improving people's lives by preventing diseases such as measles, diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis, and influenza from escalating into fatal epidemics. Despite the significant impact of these programs, a substantial number of individuals, including 20 million infants annually, lack sufficient access to vaccines. Therefore, it is imperative to raise awareness about vaccination programs.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to investigate the potential utilization of social media, assessing its scalability and robustness in delivering accurate and reliable information to individuals who are contemplating vaccination decisions for themselves or on behalf of their children.

METHODS

The protocol for this review is registered in PROSPERO (identifier CRD42022304229) and is being carried out in compliance with the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Comprehensive searches have been conducted in databases including MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health), CENTRAL (Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials), and Google Scholar. Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were deemed eligible for inclusion in this study. The target population encompasses the general public, including adults, children, and adolescents. The defined interventions comprise platforms facilitating 2-way communication for sharing information. These interventions were compared against traditional interventions and teaching methods, referred to as the control group. The outcomes assessed in the included studies encompassed days unvaccinated, vaccine acceptance, and the uptake of vaccines compared with baseline. The studies underwent a risk-of-bias assessment utilizing the Cochrane Risk-of-Bias tool for RCTs, and the certainty of evidence was evaluated using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) assessment.

RESULTS

This review included 10 studies, detailed in 12 articles published between 2012 and 2022, conducted in the United States, China, Jordan, Australia, and Israel. The studies involved platforms such as Facebook, Twitter, WhatsApp, and non-general-purpose social media. The outcomes examined in these studies focused on the uptake of vaccines compared with baseline, vaccine acceptance, and the number of days individuals remained unvaccinated. The overall sample size for this review was 26,286, with individual studies ranging from 58 to 21,592 participants. The effect direction plot derived from articles of good and fair quality indicated a nonsignificant outcome (P=.12).

CONCLUSIONS

The findings suggest that, in a real-world scenario, an equal number of positive and negative results may be expected due to the interventions' impact on the acceptance and uptake of vaccines. Nevertheless, there is a rationale for accumulating experience to optimize the use of social media with the aim of enhancing vaccination rates. Social media can serve as a tool with the potential to disseminate information and boost vaccination rates within a population. However, relying solely on social media is not sufficient, given the complex structures at play in vaccine acceptance. Effectiveness hinges on various factors working in tandem. It is crucial that authorized personnel closely monitor and moderate discussions on social media to ensure responsible and accurate information dissemination.

Effective correction of misinformation

This paper reviews correction effectiveness, highlighting which factors matter, which do not, and where further research is needed. To boost effectiveness, we recommend using detailed corrections and providing an alternative explanation wherever possible. We also recommend providing a reminder of the initial misinformation and repeating the correction. Presenting corrections pre-emptively (i.e., prebunking) or after misinformation exposure is unlikely to greatly impact correction effectiveness. There is also limited risk of repeating misinformation within a correction or that a correction will inadvertently spread misinformation to new audiences. Further research is needed into which correction formats are most effective, whether boosting correction memorability can enhance effectiveness, the effectiveness of discrediting a misinformation source, and whether distrusted correction sources can contribute to corrections backfiring.

How orientations to expertise condition the acceptance of (mis)information

This review explores psychological barriers to the acceptance of expert guidance. Specifically, the constructs of epistemic overconfidence, institutional distrust, anti-expert sentiments, anti-establishment orientations, science populism, and conspiracist worldviews are jointly considered as orientations to expertise. I review the state of the literature on their origins, prevalence, and effects on misinformation endorsement and acceptance of corrections. Addressing these psychological barriers requires building trust in institutions, backed by transparent communication and the involvement of community-based, non-expert messengers. As the review synthesizes disparate research strands, it underscores the need for future studies to compare, validate, and consolidate different orientations to expertise, understand causal relationships, and explore generalizability to diverse contexts.

Community efforts to promote vaccine uptake in a rural setting: a qualitative interview study

Vaccine hesitancy has been identified as one of the top 10 threats to global health. The causes of low vaccine uptake are many and vary at micro and macro levels. However, rural and remote coastal areas in the UK experience unique vaccine inequalities due to high levels of deprivation and their unique and complex access-related problems. This study aimed to explore community efforts to promote vaccine uptake during the COVID-19 pandemic and understand how the COVID-19 vaccination campaign was experienced by the public. We conducted an exploratory descriptive qualitative study using semi-structured interviews with decision-makers, health professionals and community members in Lincolnshire, a predominantly rural county with a long coastline, a large population of white minority ethnicities, and those living in caravan and temporary housing. Data were analysed using conventional content analysis. Overcoming the various access barriers to vaccination uptake involved working with local media stations, local communities and local community groups, translation of information, bringing vaccines closer to the people through pop-up and mobile clinics and provision of transport and ensuring confidentiality. There is a need to employ inclusive targeted non-conventional care interventions whilst dealing with complex problems as occur in rural and remote coastal regions.

Strategies to Address COVID-19 Vaccine and Pregnancy Myths

ABSTRACT

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) poses risks to pregnant women and their infants. The spread of misinformation about COVID-19 vaccination is a barrier to optimizing vaccination rates among women of childbearing age. We conducted an environmental scan to identify misinformation about COVID-19 vaccination, pregnancy, and fertility, and a review to identify evidence to refute misinformation and strategies to correct and prevent the spread of misinformation. Seven identified themes of misinformation are: the vaccine causes female infertility; can cause miscarriage; and can decrease male fertility; mRNA vaccines attack the placenta; pregnant and breastfeeding persons should not get the vaccine; the vaccine can change menstrual cycles; and vaccinated people can spread infertility symptoms to unvaccinated people. Strategies that can be implemented by social media platforms to help prevent misinformation spread and correct existing health misinformation include improving information regulation by modifying community standards, implementing surveillance algorithms, and applying warning labels to potentially misleading posts. Health services organizations and clinicians can implement health misinformation policies, directly recommend vaccinations, provide credible explanations and resources to debunk misinformation, educate patients and populations on spotting misinformation, and apply effective communication strategies. More research is needed to assess longer-term effects of vaccination among women of childbearing age to strengthen the defense against misinformation and to evaluate strategies that aim to prevent and correct misinformation spread about COVID-19 vaccinations.

From pandemic to Plandemic: Examining the amplification and attenuation of COVID-19 misinformation on social media

This study examines the proliferation of COVID-19 misinformation through Plandemic-a pseudo-documentary of COVID-19 conspiracy theories-on social media and examines how factors such as (a) themes of misinformation, (b) types of misinformation, (c) sources of misinformation, (d) emotions of misinformation, and (e) fact-checking labels amplify or attenuate online misinformation during the early days of the pandemic. Using CrowdTangle, a Facebook API, we collected a total of 5732 publicly available Facebook pages posts containing Plandemic-related keywords from January 1 to December 19, 2020. A random sample of 600 posts was subsequently coded, and the data were analyzed using negative binomial regression to examine factors associated with amplification and attenuation. Overall, the extended an extended Social Amplification of Risk Framework (SARF) provided a theoretical lens to understand why certain misinformation was amplified, while others were attenuated. As for posts with misinformation, results showed that themes related to private firms, treatment and prevention of virus transmission, diagnosis and health impacts, virus origins, and social impact were more likely to be amplified. While the different types of misinformation (manipulated, fabricated, or satire) and emotions were not associated with amplification, the type of fact-check labels did influence the virality of misinformation. Specifically, posts that were flagged as false by Facebook were more likely to be amplified, while the virality of posts flagged as containing partially false information was attenuated. Theoretical and practical implications were discussed.

Willingness to COVID-19 vaccination: Empirical evidence from EU

The unforgettable COVID-19 shock is most likely to be reversed by a viable vaccination strategy. In this paper, we investigate willingness to be vaccinated (WTV) against the COVID-19. Current trends suggest that only around 73% of EU inhabitants (15 and +) were immunized, with more than 104 million people still warranted to be immunized. Vaccine reluctance is a key impediment to conducting immunization programs in the setting of a pandemic. We provide first of its kind empirical evidence on the citizens (N = 11,932) of the EU-27 by employing the recent data from the European Commission. Based on the survey responses, controlling for the correlations in the error terms, we utilize a simulated multivariate probit regression model. Our results show that amongst all the statistically significant drivers of the WTV, the positive perception (vaccination works and has no side effects); R&D information (clarity on how vaccination is developed, tested, authorized) has the largest impact on the WTV. We find that the group of variables on social feedback (Positive perception; social adoption and pressure), and on trustworthy sources of information (R&D info; medical advice) are to be considered for WTV policy. The counteracting policy gaps that act against WTV include vaccination governance dissatisfaction, perception of long-term side effects, growing mistrust in information sources, uncertainty between safety and efficacy, education level, and risky age group. Strategies based on the outcomes of this study are needed to address public acceptance and willingness to vaccinate during a pandemic. This research is novel and offers authorities in-depth insights into the challenges and solutions regarding the COVID-19 pandemic and thus to its end via stimulation of the WTV.

Social media promotion, risk perception, and parental support for adolescent girls' HPV vaccination: Taking consideration of future consequences and sexual attitudes as moderators

HPV vaccine hesitancy in Asia is unique compared to western countries. Concerning whether social media promotion about HPV vaccine will be related with parental support for Chinese adolescent girls, we investigated the correlation among social media promotion, risk perception of HPV vaccine and parental support. Through the theoretical lens of Health Action Process Approach model (HAPA), we found that social media promotion could reduce the risk perception of HPV vaccine and promoted parental supportive decision, and risk perception played a mediation role between social media information exposure to vaccine and parental support. Consideration of future consequences has been found to play a moderating role between social media promotion and risk perception, and parents' sexual attitudes moderated the effect of social media promotion on parental support. Implications of the findings are discussed.

Relation of Personal Characteristics with Human Papillomavirus Vaccination Outcomes: Assessing the Mediating Role of Vaccine Hesitancy Dimensions

Recent findings suggest that the rate of certain cancers can be reduced by increasing human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination coverage, resulting in considerable research interest on the antecedents of HPV vaccine receipt to identify avenues to promote vaccination. The current article continues this stream of research by (1) studying the three HPV vaccination outcomes of willingness, receipt, and word-of-mouth, (2) investigating the antecedent effects of sociodemographic characteristics, health insurance status, provider conversation, and political orientation, and (3) testing the mediating role of vaccine hesitancy dimensions using a recently developed conceptualization. We achieve these goals by conducting a cross-sectional study with 404 participants (Agemean = 37.64; AgeSD = 14.91; 57% female; 72% white; 100% located in U.S.). Our results show that provider conversations and political orientation had the most consistent and strong effects of the personal characteristics, whereas perceptions that vaccines pose health risks and perceptions that vaccines are not needed for healthy individuals produced the most consistent and strong effects of the vaccine hesitancy dimensions. Other personal characteristics and vaccine hesitancy dimensions also produced intermittent significant effects, including age, education, and race. Together, these results support that personal characteristics and vaccine hesitancy dimensions relate to a broader range of outcomes associated with HPV vaccination than previously known, and these results also support that the recently developed conceptualization of vaccine hesitancy is apt for understanding HPV vaccine perceptions. Our discussion concludes with highlighting avenues for future research and practice that can leverage our discovered relations to improve HPV vaccination outcomes.

"It seems impossible that it's been made so quickly": a qualitative investigation of concerns about the speed of COVID-19 vaccine development and how these may be overcome

The speed of COVID-19 vaccine development has been identified as a central concern contributing to hesitancy in acceptance. We conducted qualitative interviews to gain a greater understanding into these concerns and to identify what might address them. Twelve qualitative interviews were conducted with participants identifying as hesitant for COVID-19 vaccination and reporting concern about the speed of vaccine development. Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis (IPA) was used. Concerns about speed comprised the linked themes of i) difficulty understanding the pace, and, ii) worry about the implications for vaccine safety. Uncertainties concerning the pandemic led to a notable desire for credible and understandable information regarding the vaccines, which many participants felt was not available. Four routes to resolving uncertainty about whether to be vaccinated were identified. First, waiting for more information about the vaccines, such as about their contents and impact on transmission. Second, a growing perception that the vaccines must be safe given the large numbers already vaccinated. Third, viewing the vaccines as necessary - even if unappealing - for ending the pandemic. Finally, a feeling that there would be no choice but to have a vaccine. Examples of what might reduce hesitancy were given, including interviews with vaccine developers and knowing others of similar age having safely been vaccinated. The pace of development broke expectations set earlier in the pandemic. This was interpreted negatively due to a perceived lack of credible information. Most participants could envisage ways their concerns could be resolved, enough for them to have a vaccine.

Willingness to accept a second COVID-19 vaccination booster dose among healthcare workers in Italy

Background

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is evolving,the newly emerged Omicron variant being the dominant strain worldwide, and this has raised concerns about vaccine efficacy. The purposes of this survey were to examine the extent to which healthcare workers (HCWs) intend to receive a second booster dose of the COVID-19 vaccine and the factors that influence their willingness to accept it.

Methods

The study was conducted among HCWs who were randomly selected from four public hospitals in the Campania region, Southern Italy.

Results

A total of 496 HCWs answered the questionnaire (a response rate of 61.2%). Among the respondents, 20.8% indicated a score of 10, using a 10-point Likert-type scale, regarding the usefulness of a second COVID-19 vaccine booster dose. Physicians, HCWs who believed that COVID-19 was a severe disease, and those who have acquired information about the second booster dose from scientific journals were more likely to have this positive attitude. Slightly more than half of HCWs self-reported willingness to receive a second booster dose. Respondents who believe that HCWs are at higher risk of being infected by SARS-CoV-2, those who have a higher belief that COVID-19 is a severe disease, and those who have a higher belief that a second booster dose is useful were more willing to receive a second booster dose. The main reasons for those who had a positive intention were to protect their family members and patients, whereas, the main reasons for not getting vaccinated or for uncertainty were that the dose does not offer protection against the emerging variants and the fear of its side effects. HCWs of younger age, physicians, those who have a higher belief that a second booster dose is useful, and those who were willing to receive a second booster dose were more likely to recommend the booster dose to their patients.

Conclusion

This study's findings highlight the necessity for designing and implementing educational interventions for improving second booster dose uptake and beliefs among HCWs and their capacity to recommend the vaccine to the patients.

Coping with mental health issues via communicative action in the digital age: testing cybercoping models

BACKGROUND

Mental health issues have become critical social problems around the world. Individuals who are suffering from mental health problems tend to obtain health information and social support in the digital media environment. However, there has been little research on how information-seeking and information-forwarding behaviors affect sufferers' coping processes and outcomes. Based on communicative behaviors of people in online to solve health problmes, this study aims to apply two cybercoping modes proposed by previous reserach to mental health issues.

METHOD

Using anxiety and depression issues, this study conducted an online survey (N = 560) to examine two cybercoping models with data collected from an online crowdsourcing platform (Amazon's Mechanical Turk). Structural equation modeling (SEM) was conducted to test the cybercoping models in the context of mental health issues.

RESULTS

Results of the first cybercoping model showed that information seeking was positively associated with coping outcomes, whereas information forwarding was not significant. While information seeking in the second cybercoping model was significantly associated with other factors, information forwarding was not significant. The second model revealed that coping processes fully mediate between information seeking and cybercoping outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

This study contributes to the theoretical building of cybercoping models in the context of mental health issues by illustrating the effects of information seeking on cybercoping outcomes. Health care practitioners may use these results to better understand which communicative processes in online mental health communication are positively associated with specific coping processes and outcomes.

Effects of Health Literacy in the Fight Against the COVID-19 Infodemic: The Case of Japan

This study quantitatively examines whether health literacy can reduce belief in COVID-19 misinformation and conspiracy theories. Conducting path and cluster analyses on survey data collected from 1,488 adults in Japan in 2021, we found that while health literacy reduces people's belief about COVID-19 and vaccination misinformation, it has no direct effect on their belief in COVID-19 conspiracy theories. That said, the results also highlighted the importance of health literacy. It is found that even though high health literacy does not guarantee a low degree of conspiracy beliefs, low health literacy is associated with high susceptibility to both misinformation and conspiracy theories. Moreover, people who relied more on social media than mass media for COVID-19 news and reported on having been more severely affected by the pandemic were found to be more likely to have lower health literacy and higher belief in misinformation and conspiracy theories. Based on the findings, we discussed ways to enhance health literacy research and promotion in Japan.

Climate change, vaccines, GMO: The N400 effect as a marker of attitudes toward scientific issues

While the psychological predictors of antiscience beliefs have been extensively studied, neural underpinnings of the antiscience beliefs have received relatively little interest. The aim of the current study is to investigate whether attitudes towards the scientific issues are reflected in the N400 potential. Thirty-one individuals were asked to judge whether six different issues presented as primes (vaccines, medicines, nuclear energy, solar energy, genetically-modified organisms (GMO), natural farming) are well-described by ten positive and ten negative target words. EEG was recorded during the task. Furthermore, participants were asked to rate their own expertise in each of the six topics. Both positive and negative target words related to GMO elicited larger N400, than targets associated with vaccines and natural farming. The results of the current study show that N400 may be an indicator of the ambiguous attitude toward scientific issues.

Exploring content of misinformation about HPV vaccine on twitter

Although social media can be a source of guidance about HPV vaccination for parents, the information may not always be complete or accurate. We conducted a retrospective content analysis to identify content and frequencies of occurrence of disinformation and misinformation about HPV vaccine posted on Twitter between December 15, 2019, through March 31, 2020, among 3876 unique, English language #HPV Tweets, excluding retweets. We found that 24% of Tweets contained disinformation or misinformation, and the remaining 76% contained support/education. The most prevalent categories of disinformation/misinformation were (1) adverse health effects (59%), (2) mandatory vaccination (19%), and (3) inefficacy of the vaccine (14%). Among the adverse health effects Tweets, non-specific harm/injury (51%) and death (23%) were most frequent. Disinformation/misinformation Tweets vs. supportive Tweets had 5.44 (95% CI 5.33–5.56) times the incidence rate of retweet. In conclusion, almost one-quarter of #HPV Tweets contained disinformation or misinformation about the HPV vaccine and these tweets received higher audience engagement including likes and retweets. Implications for vaccine hesitancy are discussed.

COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and patient self-advocacy: a statistical analysis of those who can and can't get vaccinated

Background

This study applies the Patient Self-Advocacy scale to investigate vaccine hesitancy in New Zealand. Due to New Zealand’s very limited tertiary hospital system and vulnerable populations, the Government’s strategy to address COVID-19 has been to prevent the virus from entering the nation and to eliminate it when it does cross the border. Therefore, there is no opportunity for the nation to generate any acquired immunity through exposure. To transition from closed borders, New Zealand will need to run a highly successful national vaccination programme and this needs to have the ability to drive influential public health messaging to the targeted places within the communities where vaccine hesitancy most exists.

Methods

This study employed statistical methods. A nationally representative survey of adults in New Zealand (n = 1852) was collected via Qualtrics. Independent samples t-tests, and multiple regression were used to explore the research questions.

Results

Those who identify as medically able to be vaccinated expressed significantly higher confidence in the COVID-19 vaccine than those who identified as unable to be vaccinated. Patient-self advocacy had a positive effect on vaccine confidence. Individuals who identify as able to be vaccinated have less hesitancy. Demographics had various effects on vaccine hesitancy.

Conclusion

The research highlights particularly important insights into vaccine hesitancy related to patient self-advocacy behaviours, and various demographic variables such as political affiliation. In addition, the research adds further clarity on how and why New Zealanders have responded to the COVID-vaccine. Finally, the importance of vaccine literacy is discussed.

Countering vaccine hesitancy through medical expert endorsement

Scientists and medical experts are among the professionals trusted the most. Are they also the most suitable figures to convince the general public to get vaccinated? In a pre-registered experiment, we tested whether expert endorsement increases the effectiveness of debunking messages about COVID-19 vaccines. We monitored a sample of 2,277 people in Italy through a longitudinal study along the salient phases of the vaccination campaign. Participants received a series of messages endorsed by either medical researchers (experimental group) or by generic others (control). In order to minimise demand effects, we collected participants’ responses always at ten days from the last debunking message. Whereas we did not find an increase in vaccination behaviour, we found that participants in the experimental group displayed higher intention to vaccinate, as well as more positive beliefs about the protectiveness of vaccines. The more debunking messages the participants received, the greater the increase in vaccination intention in the experimental group compared to control. This suggests that multiple exposure is critical for the effectiveness of expert-endorsed debunking messages. In addition, these effects are significant regardless of participants’ trust toward science. Our results suggest that scientist and medical experts are not simply a generally trustworthy category but also a well suited messenger in contrasting disinformation during vaccination campaigns.

Impact of COVID-19 vaccine misinformation on virality on social media: Content analysis of message themes and writing strategies

Background

Vaccines serve an integral role in containing pandemics, yet vaccine hesitancy is prevalent globally. One key reason for this hesitancy is the pervasiveness of misinformation on social media. Although considerable research attention has been drawn to how exposure to misinformation is closely associated with vaccine hesitancy, little scholarly attention has been given to the investigation or robust theorizing of the various content themes pertaining to antivaccine misinformation about COVID-19 and the writing strategies in which these content themes are manifested. Virality of such content on social media exhibited in the form of comments, shares, and reactions has practical implications for COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy.

Objective

We investigated whether there were differences in the content themes and writing strategies used to disseminate antivaccine misinformation about COVID-19 and their impact on virality on social media.

Methods

We constructed an antivaccine misinformation database from major social media platforms during September 2019-August 2021 to examine how misinformation exhibited in the form of content themes and how these themes manifested in writing were associated with virality in terms of likes, comments, and shares. Antivaccine misinformation was retrieved from two globally leading and widely cited fake news databases, COVID Global Misinformation Dashboard and International Fact-Checking Network Corona Virus Facts Alliance Database, which aim to track and debunk COVID-19 misinformation. We primarily focused on 140 Facebook posts, since most antivaccine misinformation posts on COVID-19 were found on Facebook. We then employed quantitative content analysis to examine the content themes (ie, safety concerns, conspiracy theories, efficacy concerns) and manifestation strategies of misinformation (ie, mimicking of news and scientific reports in terms of the format and language features, use of a conversational style, use of amplification) in these posts and their association with virality of misinformation in the form of likes, comments, and shares.

Results

Our study revealed that safety concern was the most prominent content theme and a negative predictor of likes and shares. Regarding the writing strategies manifested in content themes, a conversational style and mimicking of news and scientific reports via the format and language features were frequently employed in COVID-19 antivaccine misinformation, with the latter being a positive predictor of likes.

Conclusions

This study contributes to a richer research-informed understanding of which concerns about content theme and manifestation strategy need to be countered on antivaccine misinformation circulating on social media so that accurate information on COVID-19 vaccines can be disseminated to the public, ultimately reducing vaccine hesitancy. The liking of COVID-19 antivaccine posts that employ language features to mimic news or scientific reports is perturbing since a large audience can be reached on social media, potentially exacerbating the spread of misinformation and hampering global efforts to combat the virus.

HPV and COVID-19 vaccines: Social media use, confidence, and intentions among parents living in different community types in the United States

Our study measured parental confidence and intention/uptake of two adolescent vaccines (HPV and COVID-19), focusing on differences among community types including urban, suburban, and rural. Although social media provides a way for misinformation to spread, it remains a viable forum for countering misinformation and engaging parents with positive vaccine information across community types. Yet, little is understood about differences in social media use and vaccine attitudes and behaviors for parents living in rural, suburban and urban areas. We sought to determine how to better reach parents living in different community types with targeted social media channels and messaging. In August 2021, we used a cross-sectional survey programmed in Qualtrics to collect data from 452 parents of children ages 9 to 14 living in different community types across the United States. Participants came from a survey panel maintained by CloudResearch. Survey questions asked about demographics, political affiliation, community type, social media use, health and vaccine information sources, and attitudes and behaviors regarding the HPV and COVID-19 vaccines. Our sample of parents (n = 452) most frequently used Facebook (76%), followed by YouTube (55%), and Instagram (43%). When comparing social media use by community type, parents used the top platforms at similar rates. Social media use was associated with vaccine confidence and intention/uptake in unadjusted models but not in adjusted models. Further, there were no significant differences in HPV vaccine confidence or intention/uptake by community type (i.e., rural, suburban, urban). For the COVID-19 vaccine, parents in rural communities were less likely to have vaccine confidence and intention/uptake in the unadjusted model. For both HPV and COVID-19 vaccines, political affiliation was the only common factor associated with both vaccine confidence and intention/uptake. Parents who identified as Democrat compared to Republican had greater confidence in the vaccines and had higher odds of vaccine intention/uptake for their children. Although rurality has been associated with vaccine confidence in the past we did not find that in our study. Instead, political affiliation appeared to explain most of the variation in vaccine confidence and intention/uptake, suggesting that more research is needed to identify best practices for using social media to reach parents with different political beliefs.

Covid-19 Vaccine Fact-checking Posts on Facebook: An Observational Study

BACKGROUND

Effective interventions aimed at correcting COVID-19 vaccine misinformation, known as fact-checking messages, are needed to combat the mounting anti-vaccine infodemic and alleviate vaccine hesitancy.

OBJECTIVE

This works investigates (a) the changes of the public's attitude toward COVID-19 vaccines over time, (b) the effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccine fact-checking information on social media engagement and attitude change, and (c) the emotion and linguistic features of COVID-19 vaccine fact-checking information ecosystem.

METHODS

We collected a dataset of 12,553 COVID-19 vaccine fact-checking Facebook posts and their associated comments (N=122,362) from January 2020 - March 2022 and conducted a series of natural language processing and statistical analyses to investigate trends in public attitude toward the vaccine in COVID-19 vaccine fact-checking posts and comments, and emotional and linguistic features of the COVID-19 fact-checking information ecosystem.

RESULTS

The percentage of fact-checking posts relative to all COVID-19 vaccine posts peaked in May of 2020 and then steadily decreased as the pandemic progressed (r = -.92, df = 21, t = -10.94, 95% CI = [-.97, -.82], P < .001). The salience of COVID-19 vaccine entities was significantly lower in comments (M = 0.03, t = 39.28, P < .001) than in posts (M = 0.09). Third-party fact checkers have been taking a more important role with more fact-checking over time (r = .63, df = 25, t = 4.06, 95% CI = [.33, .82], P < .001). COVID-19 vaccine fact-checking posts continued to be more analytical (r = .81, df = 25, t = 6.88, 95% CI = [.62, .91], P < .001) and more confident (r = .59, df = 25, t = 3.68, 95% CI = [.27, .79], P = .001) over time. While comments did not exhibit a significant increase in confidence over time, tentativeness in comments decreased significantly (r = -.62, df = 25, t = -3.94, 95% CI = [-.81, -.31], P = .001). While hospitals receive less engagement than other information sources, the comments expressed more positive attitudinal valence in comments compared to other information sources (b = 0.06, 95% CI = [0.00, 0.12], t = 2.03, P = .043).

CONCLUSIONS

The percentage of fact-checking posts relative to all posts about the vaccine steadily decreased after May of 2020. As the pandemic progressed, third-party fact checkers played a larger role in posting fact-checking COVID-19 vaccine posts. COVID-19 vaccine fact-checking posts continued to be more analytical and more confident over time, reflecting increased confidence in posts. Similarly, tentativeness in comments decreased; this likewise suggests that public uncertainty diminished over time. COVID-19 fact-checking vaccine posts from hospitals yielded more positive attitudes toward vaccination than other information sources. At the same time, hospitals received less engagement than other information sources. This suggests that hospitals should invest more in generating engaging public health campaigns on social media.

CLINICALTRIAL

A Framework for Online Public Health Debates: Some Design Elements for Visual Analytics Systems

Nowadays, many people are deeply concerned about their physical well-being; as a result, they invest much time and effort investigating health-related topics. In response to this, many online websites and social media profiles have been created, resulting in a plethora of information on such topics. In a given topic, oftentimes, much of the information is conflicting, resulting in online camps that have different positions and arguments. We refer to the collection of all such positionings and entrenched camps on a topic such as an online public health debate. The information people encounter regarding such debates can ultimately influence how they make decisions, what they believe, and how they act. Therefore, there is a need for public health stakeholders (i.e., people with a vested interest in public health issues) to be able to make sense of online debates quickly and accurately. In this paper, we present a framework-based approach for investigating online public health debates—a preliminary work that can be expanded upon. We first introduce the concept of online debate entities (ODEs), which is a generalization for those who participate in online debates (e.g., websites and Twitter profiles). We then present the framework ODIN (Online Debate entIty aNalyzer), in which we identify, define, and justify ODE attributes that we consider important for making sense of online debates. Next, we provide an overview of four online public health debates (vaccines, statins, cannabis, and dieting plans) using ODIN. Finally, we showcase four prototype visual analytics systems whose design elements are informed by the ODIN framework.

A Shot in the Arm for Vaccination Intention: The Media and the Health Belief Model in Three Chinese Societies

This large-sample study of three Chinese societies—Mainland China, Taiwan, and Hong Kong—demonstrates the importance of media exposure for people’s vaccination intentions during the COVID-19 pandemic. By employing two constructs (i.e., perceived susceptibility and severity) in the health belief model (HBM), the study identifies significant indirect effects of media exposure on individuals’ vaccination intention in all three Chinese societies. That said, media trust negatively moderated the path from perceived severity to vaccination intention in Mainland China and Taiwan. In these two societies, the higher an individual’s trust in media, the less influence of perceived severity on his/her vaccination intention. It suggests that the level of trust in media is a contextual factor in explaining individuals’ decision-making on health issues. Generally, the combination of the HBM and media trust has been proven to be useful for understanding individuals’ vaccination intentions. These findings provide practical considerations for governmental agencies, public institutions, and health campaign designers to promote vaccination in the pandemic.

Unlocking Conspiracy Belief Systems: How Fact-Checking Label on Twitter Counters Conspiratorial MMR Vaccine Misinformation

This study tested whether a simple fact-checking label on Twitter effectively reduces vaccine conspiracy beliefs, misinformation engagement intentions, and vaccination intentions. A web-based experiment (N = 206) of adults living in the United States through Amazon Mechanical Turk (MTurk) was conducted for the measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccine in March 2020. The results showed that the fact-checking label attached to the conspiratorial misinformation post significantly reduced MMR vaccine conspiracy beliefs compared to the no fact-checking (misinformation-only) condition but did not directly affect MMR misinformation engagement intentions and MMR vaccination intentions. In addition, we found that the fact-checking label effectively decreased vaccine conspiracy beliefs and misinformation engagement intentions for those whose prior favorable attitudes toward MMR vaccination were relatively low. Based on our findings, we suggest that public health professionals and health communicators use the fact-checking label as a promising tool for countering conspiracy theories about vaccination. However, they should further seek alternative ways to limit the public's engagement in misinformation-related activities on social media and promote health protective behavioral intentions, given the limited effects of fact-checking labels.

Vaccine misinformation types and properties in Russian troll tweets

OBJECTIVE

To identify the content of and engagement with vaccine misinformation from Russian trolls on Twitter.

METHODS

Troll tweets (N = 1959) obtained from Twitter in 2020 were coded for vaccine misinformation (α = 0.77-0.97). Descriptive, bivariate, and multivariable negative binomial regressions were applied to estimate robust incidence rate ratios (IRRs) and 95% confidence intervals (95 %CI) of vaccine misinformation associations with tweet characteristics and engagement (i.e., replies, likes, retweets).

RESULTS

Misinformation about personal dangers (43.0%), civil liberty violations (20.2%), and vaccine conspiracies (18.6%) were common. More misinformation tweets used anti-vaccination language (97.3% vs. 13.2%) and referenced symptoms (37.4% vs. 0.5%) than non-misinformation tweets. Fewer misinformation tweets referenced credible sources (14.0% vs. 19.5%), were formatted as headlines (39.2% vs. 77.0%), and mentioned specific vaccines (11.3% vs. 36.1%, all p < 0.01) than non-misinformation tweets. Personal dangers misinformation had 83% lower rate of retweets (95 %CI 0.04-0.66). Civil liberties misinformation had significantly higher rate of replies (IRR: 7.65, 95 %CI 1.06-55.46), but lower overall engagement (IRR: 0.38, 95 %CI 0.16-0.88) than non-misinformation tweets.

CONCLUSIONS

Strategies used to promote vaccine misinformation provide insight into the nature of vaccine misinformation online and public responses. Our findings suggest a need to explore influences on whether users reject or entertain online vaccine misinformation.

Collective Value Promotes the Willingness to Share Pro-Vaccination Messages on Social Media in China: A Randomized Controlled Trial (Preprint)

Background

The proliferation of vaccine misinformation on social media has seriously corrupted the public’s confidence in vaccination. Proactively sharing provaccination messages on social media is a cost-effective way to enhance global vaccination rates and resist vaccine misinformation. However, few strategies for encouraging the public to proactively share vaccine-related knowledge on social media have been developed.

Objective

This research examines the effect of value type (individual vs collective) and message framing (gain vs loss) on influenza vaccination intention (experiment 1) and the willingness to share provaccination messages (experiment 2) among Chinese adults during the COVID-19 pandemic. The primary aim was to evaluate whether messages that emphasized collective value were more effective in increasing the willingness to share than messages that emphasized individual value.

Methods

We enrolled 450 Chinese adults for experiment 1 (n=250, 55.6%) and experiment 2 (n=200, 44.4%). Participants were randomly assigned to individual-gain, individual-loss, collective-gain, or collective-loss conditions with regard to the message in each experiment using the online survey platform’s randomization function. Experiment 1 also included a control group. The primary outcome was influenza vaccination intention in experiment 1 and the willingness to share provaccination messages in experiment 2.

Results

The valid sample included 213 adults in experiment 1 (females: n=151, 70.9%; mean age 29 [SD 9] years; at least some college education: n=202, 94.8%; single: n=131, 61.5%) and 171 adults in experiment 2 (females: n=106, 62.0%; mean age 28 [SD 7] years; at least some college education: n=163, 95.3%; single: n=95, 55.6%). Influenza vaccination intention was stronger in the individual-value conditions than in the collective-value conditions (F_3,166=4.96, P=.03, η²=0.03). The reverse result was found for the willingness to share provaccination messages (F_3,165=6.87, P=.01, η²=0.04). Specifically, participants who received a message emphasizing collective value had a higher intention to share the message than participants who read a message emphasizing individual value (F_3,165=6.87, P=.01, η²=0.04), and the perceived responsibility for message sharing played a mediating role (indirect effect=0.23, 95% lower limit confidence interval [LLCI] 0.41, 95% upper limit confidence interval [ULCI] 0.07). In addition, gain framing facilitated influenza vaccination intention more than loss framing (F_3,166=5.96, P=.02, η²=0.04). However, experiment 2 did not find that message framing affected message-sharing willingness. Neither experiment found an interaction between value type and message framing.

Conclusions

Strengthened individual value rather than collective value is more likely to persuade Chinese adults to vaccinate. However, these adults are more likely to share a message that emphasizes collective rather than individual value, and the perceived responsibility for message sharing plays a mediating role.

Exploring public perceptions of the COVID-19 vaccine online from a cultural perspective: Semantic network analysis of two social media platforms in the United States and China

The development and uptake of the COVID-19 (coronavirus disease 2019) vaccine is a top priority in stifling the COVID-19 pandemic. How the public perceives the COVID-19 vaccine is directly associated with vaccine compliance and vaccination coverage. This study takes a cultural sensitivity perspective and adopts two well-known social media platforms in the United States (Twitter) and China (Weibo) to conduct a public perception comparison around the COVID-19 vaccine. By implementing semantic network analysis, results demonstrate that the two countries' social media users overlapped in themes concerning domestic vaccination policies, priority groups, challenges from COVID-19 variants, and the global pandemic situation. However, Twitter users were prone to disclose individual vaccination experiences, express anti-vaccine attitudes. In comparison, Weibo users manifested evident deference to authorities and exhibited more positive feelings toward the COVID-19 vaccine. Those disparities were explained by the cultural characteristics' differences between the two countries. The findings provide insights into comprehending public health issues in cross-cultural contexts and illustrate the potential of utilizing social media to conduct health informatics studies and investigate public perceptions during public health crisis time.

Understanding Human Papillomavirus Vaccine Promotions and Hesitancy in Northern California Through Examining Public Facebook Pages and Groups

Human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination coverage among adolescents is lower in rural regions and remains under the 80% coverage goal by Healthy People 2030. Through both sentiment analysis and topic modeling, this research examines how local health agencies and groups in nine Northern California counties promote HPV vaccines through Facebook and how target populations react to promotion posts in comments that elucidate their sentiments and hesitancy toward HPV vaccination. In January 2021, we identified 2,105 public Facebook pages and 1,065 groups related to health within the counties and collected a total of 212 posts and 505 comments related to the HPV vaccine. The posts were published between 2010 and 2021, with the majority (83%) published after 2017. There were large variations of Facebook activities across counties. We categorized four counties with HPV vaccination initiation rates below 40% as low-coverage counties and five counties with rates above 40% as high-coverage counties. In general, low-coverage counties had fewer Facebook activities in comparison to high coverage. Results showed that, on average, comments about the HPV vaccine exhibited more positive emotion, more negative emotion, and more anger than the posts. Overall, thematic topics that emerged from posts centered around awareness and screening of HPV and cervical cancer, STI testing services, information sources, and calls to action for health services. However, comment topics did not correspond to posts and were mostly related to vaccine hesitancy, discussing vaccine risks, safety concerns, and distrust in vaccine science, citing misinformation. When comparing high- versus low-coverage counties, posts expressed similar sentiments; however, comments within high-coverage counties expressed more anger than in low-coverage counties. Comments from both high- and low-coverage counties expressed concerns with vaccine safety, risks, and injury. It is important to note that commenters exchanged information sources and tried to address misinformation themselves. Our results suggest that the promotion of HPV vaccines from public Facebook pages and groups is limited in frequency and content diversity. This illustrates problems with generalized social media vaccination promotion without community tailoring and addressing specific hesitancy concerns. Public health agencies should listen to the thoughts of targeted audiences reflected through comments and design relevant messages to address these concerns for HPV vaccination promotion.

Public sentiment analysis and topic modeling regarding COVID-19 vaccines on the Reddit social media platform: A call to action for strengthening vaccine confidence

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic fueled one of the most rapid vaccine developments in history. However, misinformation spread through online social media often leads to negative vaccine sentiment and hesitancy.

METHODS

To investigate COVID-19 vaccine-related discussion in social media, we conducted a sentiment analysis and Latent Dirichlet Allocation topic modeling on textual data collected from 13 Reddit communities focusing on the COVID-19 vaccine from Dec 1, 2020, to May 15, 2021. Data were aggregated and analyzed by month to detect changes in any sentiment and latent topics.

RESULTS

Polarity analysis suggested these communities expressed more positive sentiment than negative regarding the vaccine-related discussions and has remained static over time. Topic modeling revealed community members mainly focused on side effects rather than outlandish conspiracy theories.

CONCLUSION

Covid-19 vaccine-related content from 13 subreddits show that the sentiments expressed in these communities are overall more positive than negative and have not meaningfully changed since December 2020. Keywords indicating vaccine hesitancy were detected throughout the LDA topic modeling. Public sentiment and topic modeling analysis regarding vaccines could facilitate the implementation of appropriate messaging, digital interventions, and new policies to promote vaccine confidence.

Why Do Citizens Share COVID-19 Fact-Checks Posted by Chinese Government Social Media Accounts? The Elaboration Likelihood Model

Widespread misinformation about COVID-19 poses a significant threat to citizens long-term health and the combating of the disease. To fight the spread of misinformation, Chinese governments have used official social media accounts to participate in fact-checking activities. This study aims to investigate why citizens share fact-checks about COVID-19 and how to promote this activity. Based on the elaboration likelihood model, we explore the effects of peripheral cues (social media capital, social media strategy, media richness, and source credibility) and central cues (content theme and content importance) on the number of shares of fact-checks posted by official Chinese Government social media accounts. In total, 820 COVID-19 fact-checks from 413 Chinese Government Sina Weibo accounts were obtained and evaluated. Results show that both peripheral and central cues play important roles in the sharing of fact-checks. For peripheral cues, social media capital and media richness significantly promote the number of shares. Compared with the push strategy, both the pull strategy and networking strategy facilitate greater fact-check sharing. Fact-checks posted by Central Government social media accounts receive more shares than local government accounts. For central cues, content importance positively predicts the number of shares. In comparison to fact-checks about the latest COVID-19 news, government actions received fewer shares, while social conditions received more shares.

Using structural equation modeling to predict Indian people's attitudes and intentions towards COVID-19 vaccination

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Understanding people's attitudes towards Covid-19 vaccination is crucial to the successful implementation of a vaccination program. Hence this research study seeks to identify critical factors influencing Indian people's attitudes and intentions to take up Covid-19 vaccinations.

METHODS

An online questionnaire was administered to a sample (n = 254) drawn from Indian population, to assess the impact of perceived benefits, risk perceptions, social media exposure, social norms, and trust associated with Covid-19 vaccines on people's attitudes towards Covid-19 vaccines and their intentions to take up the Covid-19 vaccinations.

RESULTS

The findings showed that the perceived benefits, social norms, and trust correlated significantly with people's attitudes towards Covid-19 vaccinations. In contrast, risk perceptions and social media exposure showed an insignificant influence on people's attitudes towards Covid-19 vaccinations. Social norms, trust, and people's attitudes towards the Covid-19 vaccinations are significantly correlated with their intentions to take up Covid-19 vaccinations. On the contrary, social media exposure was found to have an insignificant influence on people's intentions to take up Covid-19 vaccinations.

CONCLUSION

Participants' intentions to take up Covid-19 vaccinations was influenced mainly by their attitudes and perceptions of Covid-19 vaccines in general, which strongly confirms the importance of various dimensions (perceived benefits, trust, social norms) of Covid-19 vaccines in cultivating Covid-19 vaccination acceptance among participants'.

Behavioural intention of receiving COVID-19 vaccination, social media exposures and peer discussions in China

The study aimed to investigate behavioural intentions to receive free and self-paid COVID-19 vaccinations (BICV-F and BICV-SP) among Chinese university students if the vaccine was 80% effective with rare mild side effects, to examine their associations with social media exposures and peer discussions regarding COVID-19 vaccination, and to explore the mediational role of perceived information sufficiency about COVID-19 vaccination. An online anonymous survey (N = 6922) was conducted in November 2020 in five Chinese provinces. Logistic regression and path analysis were adopted. The prevalence of BICV-F and BICV-SP were 78.1% and 57.7%. BICV-F was positively associated with the frequencies of passive social media exposure (adjusted odds ratio (AOR) = 1.32, P < 0.001), active social media interaction (AOR = 1.13, P < 0.001) and peer discussions (AOR = 1.17, P < 0.001). Indirect effects of the three factors on BICV-F via perceived information sufficiency were all significant (P < 0.001). The direct effect of active social media interaction on BICV-F was significantly negative (P < 0.001). Similar associations/mediations were observed for BICV-SP. The COVID-19 vaccination intention of Chinese university students needs improvement. Boosting social media exposures and peer discussions may raise students' perceived information sufficiency and subsequently increase their vaccination intention. Considering the potential negative effect of active social media interaction, caution is needed when using social media to promote COVID-19 vaccination.

COVID-19 Vaccination: crucial roles and opportunities for the mental health professionals

Besides addressing the increased prevalence of psychiatric disorders, social challenges, and building community resilience during the crisis, mental health professionals (MHPs) are in a unique position to assist the vaccination drive against coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) in various nations. Vaccination programs are adversely affected by misinformation, fake news and vaccine hesitancy fuelled by social media. MHPs can enable this vital public health strategy by prioritizing vaccination for individuals with severe mental illness (SMI) and substance use disorders, promote awareness and public education, debunk misinformation and integrate psychosocial care into the vaccination drives. In order to target the health inequity and discrimination faced by people with SMI coupled with their additional risks, the authors urge the global mental health fraternity to tailor these crucial roles with respect to COVID-19 vaccination based on the regional needs and contexts.