From Social Media to Mainstream News: The Information Flow of the Vaccine-Autism Controversy in the US, Canada, and the UK

'Most people have no idea what autism is': Unpacking autism disclosure using social media analysis

LAY ABSTRACT

Autism disclosure - that is sharing their autism diagnosis or identity with a person or people - is a difficult decision for many autistic people. While telling people they are autistic can be positive and helpful, it can also create a lot of problems. What we have learnt is that disclosure is really complicated. Rather than asking research participants questions about what might happen, we looked at what people were saying on public social media posts (Reddit and Twitter) about what did happen. We used three years of posts that were related to autism disclosure from a wide range of adults (autistic and non-autistic). Four main ideas were created from our data, with the key finding being that society does not understand autism. This lack of understanding creates problems for autistic people in work, dating, healthcare and mental health. The remaining ideas were that autistic people should have privacy and be treated with respect, that autistic representation can help society and that non-autistic people need to do more to help autistic people. Our findings support that society needs to do more through autism advocacy, better media representation and more public role models. Increasing the accuracy of understanding of autism across society will mean that autistic people can feel safer to disclose if they want to.

Mapping the Cognitive Biases Related to Vaccination: A Scoping Review of the Literature

INTRODUCTION

Human behavior and understanding of the vaccine ecosystem play a critical role in the vaccination decision-making process. The objective of this study was to understand different cognitive biases that may lead to vaccine acceptance or hesitancy.

METHODS

The eligibility criteria for this scoping review was vaccination-related cognitive bias studies published in the English language from inception to April 2022 and available on PubMed, Embase, and Google Scholar. It included all geographical locations and individuals of all age groups and excluded studies focusing on (i) clinical trials of vaccines, (ii) vaccine research conduct bias, (iii) cognitive delay, or (iv) statistical biases. The search method also included reviewing references in the retrieved articles.

RESULTS

Overall, 58 articles were identified, and after screening, 19 were included in this study. Twenty-one cognitive biases with the potential to affect vaccination decision-making were observed. These biases were further grouped into three broad categories: cognitive biases seen while processing vaccine-related information, during vaccination-related decision-making, and due to prior beliefs regarding vaccination.

CONCLUSIONS

This review identified critical cognitive biases affecting the entire process of vaccination that can influence research and public health efforts both positively and negatively. Recognizing and mitigating these cognitive biases is crucial for maintaining the population's level of trust in vaccination programs around the world.

Health Scares: Tracing Their Nature, Growth and Spread

Background

Health scares are highly publicised threats to health that increase public concern and protective behaviours but are later shown to be unfounded. Although health scares have become more common in recent times, they have received very little research attention. This is despite the fact that health scares often have negative outcomes for individuals and community by affecting health behaviours and causing high levels of often unnecessary anxiety.

Method

In this paper we undertook a review and analysis of the major types of health scares as well as the background factors associated with health scares and their spread.

Results

We found most health scares fell into seven main categories; environmental contaminants, food, malicious incidents, medical treatments, public health interventions, radiation from technology and exotic diseases. For most health scares there are important background factors and incident characteristics that affect how they develop. Background factors include conspiracy theories, trust in governmental agencies, anxiety, modern health worries and wariness of chemicals. Incident characteristic include being newly developed, not understood or unseen, man-made rather than natural and whether the incident is out of personal control. We also identified the aspects of traditional and social media that exacerbate the rapid spread of health scares.

Conclusion

More research is needed to identify the characteristics of media stories that intensify the levels of public concern. Guidelines around the media's reporting of health incidents and potential health threats may be necessary in order to reduce levels of public anxiety and the negative public health impact of health scares.

Tracking the structure and sentiment of vaccination discussions on Mumsnet

Vaccination is one of the most impactful healthcare interventions in terms of lives saved at a given cost, leading the anti-vaccination movement to be identified as one of the top 10 threats to global health in 2019 by the World Health Organization. This issue increased in importance during the COVID-19 pandemic where, despite good overall adherence to vaccination, specific communities still showed high rates of refusal. Online social media has been identified as a breeding ground for anti-vaccination discussions. In this work, we study how vaccination discussions are conducted in the discussion forum of Mumsnet, a UK-based website aimed at parents. By representing vaccination discussions as networks of social interactions, we can apply techniques from network analysis to characterize these discussions, namely network comparison, a task aimed at quantifying similarities and differences between networks. Using network comparison based on graphlets-small connected network subgraphs-we show how the topological structure of vaccination discussions on Mumsnet differs over time, in particular before and after COVID-19. We also perform sentiment analysis on the content of the discussions and show how the sentiment toward vaccinations changes over time. Our results highlight an association between differences in network structure and changes to sentiment, demonstrating how network comparison can be used as a tool to guide and enhance the conclusions from sentiment analysis.

Brief Report: The Impact of Social and News Media Coverage on the Dissemination of Autism Research

We examined how sharing autism research articles via social and news media was associated with citations and downloads. We included articles published in 2019 from three autism-focused journals. Every 10 Twitter shares yielded a 4.4% increase in article downloads and 5.2% increase in citations. Articles with at least one Facebook post had 23.3% more downloads than those without. Articles with at least one news story had 56.9% more downloads and 39.3% more citations than those without. Descriptive analysis indicated the most shared, downloaded, and cited articles focused largely on treatments or interventions. Autism researchers should continue sharing articles via Twitter and news media because it increases the reach of their work and may better engage research and autism community members.

Futile or fertile? The effect of persuasive strategies on citizen engagement in COVID-19 vaccine-related tweets across six national health departments

National health departments across the globe have utilized persuasive strategies to promote COVID-19 vaccines through Twitter. However, the effectiveness of those strategies is unclear. This study thereby examined how national health departments deployed persuasive strategies to promote citizen engagement in COVID-19 vaccine-related tweets in six countries, including the UK, the US, Germany, Japan, South Korea, and India. Guided by the heuristic-systematic model and the health belief model, we found that national health departments differed significantly in the use of systematic-heuristic cues and health belief constructs in COVID-19 vaccine-related tweets. Generally, the provision of scientific information and appeals to anecdotes and fear positively, while appeals to bandwagon negatively, predicted citizen engagement. Messages about overcoming barriers and promoting vaccine benefits and self-efficacy positively affected engagement. Emphases of COVID-19 threats and cues to vaccinate demonstrated negative impacts. Importantly, health departments across countries often used futile or detrimental strategies in tweets. A locally adapted evidence-based approach for COVID-19 vaccination persuasion was discussed.

Fair Transmission of Individual Signals and Formation of Mainstream Information: Evidence from Herd Behaviours in Emergencies

Risk society is full of emergencies, accompanied by uncertainties and losses. Under emergencies, controlling herd behaviour is challenging due to more interactions and changes among individuals. This research establishes Bayes conditional probability models to explain the fair transmission of individual signals and individual decision-making after receiving others' signals. The simulation shows the following conclusions: first, each individual has a fair chance to influence the mainstream information; second, the order in which individuals make decisions during an emergency affects the difficulties and likelihood of making a rational decision; third, the high authority of information can become mainstream and guide individual behaviour; and fourth, two individual characteristics, including risk appetite and personal experience, are important in the fair transmission of individual signals and formation of mainstream information. According to the findings, this research proposes two strategies, including interfering with information and controlling existing key opinion leaders to control the mainstream information within a group in emergencies. These two strategies are proved to be useful in detecting and preventing approaches to alleviate individual herd behaviour, which should be monitored and controlled in machine learning models for individual behaviour simulation and prediction. Compared to previous research that focuses on media and public opinion in emergencies, this research focuses on a specific type of information (i.e., individual decision-making and actions) on the individual level and its effects on herd behaviours within the group. This research complements the explanation of the micro-mechanism of how individuals receive information and make decisions and actions.

Understanding the vaccine stance of Italian tweets and addressing language changes through the COVID-19 pandemic: Development and validation of a machine learning model

Social media is increasingly being used to express opinions and attitudes toward vaccines. The vaccine stance of social media posts can be classified in almost real-time using machine learning. We describe the use of a Transformer-based machine learning model for analyzing vaccine stance of Italian tweets, and demonstrate the need to address changes over time in vaccine-related language, through periodic model retraining. Vaccine-related tweets were collected through a platform developed for the European Joint Action on Vaccination. Two datasets were collected, the first between November 2019 and June 2020, the second from April to September 2021. The tweets were manually categorized by three independent annotators. After cleaning, the total dataset consisted of 1,736 tweets with 3 categories (promotional, neutral, and discouraging). The manually classified tweets were used to train and test various machine learning models. The model that classified the data most similarly to humans was XLM-Roberta-large, a multilingual version of the Transformer-based model RoBERTa. The model hyper-parameters were tuned and then the model ran five times. The fine-tuned model with the best F-score over the validation dataset was selected. Running the selected fine-tuned model on just the first test dataset resulted in an accuracy of 72.8% (F-score 0.713). Using this model on the second test dataset resulted in a 10% drop in accuracy to 62.1% (F-score 0.617), indicating that the model recognized a difference in language between the datasets. On the combined test datasets the accuracy was 70.1% (F-score 0.689). Retraining the model using data from the first and second datasets increased the accuracy over the second test dataset to 71.3% (F-score 0.713), a 9% improvement from when using just the first dataset for training. The accuracy over the first test dataset remained the same at 72.8% (F-score 0.721). The accuracy over the combined test datasets was then 72.4% (F-score 0.720), a 2% improvement. Through fine-tuning a machine-learning model on task-specific data, the accuracy achieved in categorizing tweets was close to that expected by a single human annotator. Regular training of machine-learning models with recent data is advisable to maximize accuracy.

COVID-19 Misinformation on Social Media and Public’s Health Behavior: Understanding the Moderating Role of Situational Motivation and Credibility Evaluations

The spread of misinformation on social networking conduit regarding COVID-19 pandemic poses deleterious consequences on public health. The author advance the body of knowledge on tackling misinformation to generate positive health behavior responses by proposing a conceptual framework based on the theory of persuasion and behavior change. Furthermore, as a belief antecedent, conspiracy theory is also used in this study. The author, using structural equation modeling technique, explored the three hundred seventy-three participants’ belief in conspiracy theory and religious misinformation and their influence on intention and behavior. Those direct relationships were tested by the joint moderating role of situational motivation and credibility evaluations. The study revealed that the situational motivation and credibility evaluation jointly and individually (in some cases) weaken the strong positive relationship between misinformation (conspiracy theory and religious misinformation) and health belief, health belief and intention, and intention and health behavior regarding COVID-19. The findings of this study offer guideline for policymakers to generate favorable health behavior regarding COVID-19 and any other epidemic or pandemic. Directions for researchers to any further extensions are also placed.

The Politicization of Health and Science: Role of Political Cues in Shaping the Beliefs of the Vaccine-Autism Link

One critical lesson learned from public opinion research about climate change is that the cost of politicization is disastrous. Although the literature has shown the dire consequences of politicized science issues, few have examined how such politicization is possibly triggered by political leaders in a seemingly nonpartisan science topic. Using two experiments (total n = 1,249), this article demonstrates how political cues over scientific expertise shape individuals' beliefs in the vaccine and autism debate. The results indicate that Republicans tend to follow President Trump compared to scientists in the subject matter. On the other hand, Democrats follow scientists but are not influenced by Trump. The implications of political encroachment into health and science are discussed.

How News Agencies' Twitter Posts on COVID-19 Vaccines Attract Audiences' Twitter Engagement: A Content Analysis

As the most important global news distributors, the big three international news agencies’ reports about COVID-19 vaccines have a great influence on people’s understanding of them. Based on the health belief model (HBM), we examined which constructs in the HBM were related to audiences’ Twitter engagement and the differences among the agencies. We content-analyzed 1162 COVID-19 vaccine-related tweets from three international news agencies’ Twitter accounts (@AFPespanol, @AP, @Reuters) from 2 December 2020 to 31 January 2021. The results showed that the most-used HBM construct was barriers, followed by benefits, susceptibility, cues to action, severity, and self-efficacy. About half of the tweets used a positive tone and nearly half of the tweets used a neutral tone, while only 3.1% of the tweets used a negative tone. Reuters used a significantly more negative tone, more neutral tone, and less positive tone than was expected. AFP used a significantly more positive tone and less neutral tone than was expected. The effectiveness of utilizing HBM constructs for vaccination promotion strongly depends on the audience context. The use of HBM constructs for vaccination was generally effective for Reuters but seems to have backfired for AFP.

Medical and Health-related Misinformation on Social Media: Analysis of the Scientific Literature

Background

Social media has been extensively used for the communication of health-related information and consecutively for the potential spread of medical misinformation. Conventional systematic reviews have been published on this topic to identify original articles and to summarize their methodological approaches and themes. A bibliometric study could complement their findings, for instance, by evaluating the geographical distribution of the publications and determining if they were well cited and disseminated in high-impact journals.

Objective

The aim of this study was to perform a bibliometric analysis of the current literature to discover the prevalent trends and topics related to medical misinformation on social media.

Methods

The Web of Science Core Collection electronic database was accessed to identify relevant papers with the following search string: ALL=(misinformati* OR “wrong informati*” OR disinformati* OR “misleading informati*” OR “fake news*”) AND ALL=(medic* OR illness* OR disease* OR health* OR pharma* OR drug* OR therap*) AND ALL=(“social media*” OR Facebook* OR Twitter* OR Instagram* OR YouTube* OR Weibo* OR Whatsapp* OR Reddit* OR TikTok* OR WeChat*). Full records were exported to a bibliometric software, VOSviewer, to link bibliographic information with citation data. Term and keyword maps were created to illustrate recurring terms and keywords.

Results

Based on an analysis of 529 papers on medical and health-related misinformation on social media, we found that the most popularly investigated social media platforms were Twitter (n=90), YouTube (n=67), and Facebook (n=57). Articles targeting these 3 platforms had higher citations per paper (>13.7) than articles covering other social media platforms (Instagram, Weibo, WhatsApp, Reddit, and WeChat; citations per paper <8.7). Moreover, social media platform–specific papers accounted for 44.1% (233/529) of all identified publications. Investigations on these platforms had different foci. Twitter-based research explored cyberchondria and hypochondriasis, YouTube-based research explored tobacco smoking, and Facebook-based research studied vaccine hesitancy related to autism. COVID-19 was a common topic investigated across all platforms. Overall, the United States contributed to half of all identified papers, and 80% of the top 10 most productive institutions were based in this country. The identified papers were mostly published in journals of the categories public environmental and occupational health, communication, health care sciences services, medical informatics, and medicine general internal, with the top journal being the Journal of Medical Internet Research.

Conclusions

There is a significant platform-specific topic preference for social media investigations on medical misinformation. With a large population of internet users from China, it may be reasonably expected that Weibo, WeChat, and TikTok (and its Chinese version Douyin) would be more investigated in future studies. Currently, these platforms present research gaps that leave their usage and information dissemination warranting further evaluation. Future studies should also include social platforms targeting non-English users to provide a wider global perspective.

HPV Vaccination Champions: Evaluating a Technology-Mediated Intervention for Parents

Human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination prevents 6 HPV-related cancers in men and women. Yet, rates of HPV vaccination among adolescents in the United States lag behind other developed nations, revealing a significant public health issue. This feasibility study tested a collaborative online learning environment to cultivate HPV vaccination champions. A 3-month training program recruited parents to serve as proponents and social media influencers to identify solutions to overcome barriers to HPV vaccination. A mixed methods study design included a pretest survey, three online asynchronous focus groups, a posttest survey, as well as a longitudinal follow-up survey at 6 months. Participants included 22 parents who self-identified as female (95.4%) and white (90.9%). Overall, there was a statistically significant difference in knowledge of HPV and HPV vaccination between pretest and posttest (p = 0.0042). This technology-mediated intervention increased parents' confidence and motivated them to speak more freely about HPV vaccination in-person and online with others in their social networks. Participants identified prevalent misinformation about HPV vaccination and learned how to effectively craft messages to address concerns related to safety and side effects, gender, understanding of risk, and sexual activity. Objective measures and qualitative open-ended assessment showed high intervention engagement and treatment satisfaction. All participants (100%) indicated that they enjoyed participating in the intervention. The effectiveness of this feasibility study suggests that social media is an appropriate platform to empower parents to counter vaccine hesitancy and misinformation through HPV vaccination information that is simple and shareable in-person and online.

Epistemic Egocentrism and Processing of Vaccine Misinformation (Vis-à-vis Scientific Evidence): The Case of Vaccine-Autism Link

A web-based 2 (preexisting position: vaccine-inclined vs. -hesitant) by 2 (message type: scientific evidence vs. misinformation) experimental study was conducted to investigate individuals' processing of misinformation (vis-à-vis scientific evidence) on the vaccine-autism link within the framework of epistemic egocentrism. Data (N = 996) collected with Qualtrics panel demonstrated that preexisting position shaped individuals' responses to vaccine-related messages differently such that vaccine-hesitant individuals processed the message more superficially while vaccine-inclined individuals more systematically. There was evidence that involvement moderated information processing. Vaccine-hesitant and -inclined individuals' intentions to seek further information and to engage others with opposite views in public deliberation were shaped by message perception and source perceptions (trustworthiness and expertise), but in different patterns. Implications of the findings for vaccine-related health communication are discussed.

Vaccine hesitancy: evidence from an adverse events following immunization database, and the role of cognitive biases

BACKGROUND

Vaccine hesitancy has been a growing challenge for public health in recent decades. Among factors contributing to vaccine hesitancy, concerns regarding vaccine safety and Adverse Events (AEs) play the leading role. Moreover, cognitive biases are critical in connecting such concerns to vaccine hesitancy behaviors, but their role has not been comprehensively studied. In this study, our first objective is to address concerns regarding vaccine AEs to increase vaccine acceptance. Our second objective is to identify the potential cognitive biases connecting vaccine hesitancy concerns to vaccine-hesitant behaviors and identify the mechanism they get triggered in the vaccine decision-making process.

METHODS

First, to mitigate concerns regarding AEs, we quantitatively analyzed the U.S. Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) from 2011 to 2018 and provided evidence regarding the non-severity of the AEs that can be used as a communicable summary to increase vaccine acceptance. Second, we focused on the vaccination decision-making process. We reviewed cognitive biases and vaccine hesitancy literature to identify the most potential cognitive biases that affect vaccine hesitancy and categorized them adopting the Precaution Adoption Process Model (PAPM).

RESULTS

Our results show that the top frequent AEs are expected mild reactions like injection site erythema (4.29%), pyrexia (3.66%), and injection site swelling (3.21%). 94.5% of the reports are not serious and the average population-based serious reporting rate over the 8 years was 25.3 reports per 1 million population. We also identified 15 potential cognitive biases that might affect people's vaccination decision-making and nudge them toward vaccine hesitancy. We categorized these biases based on the factors that trigger them and discussed how they contribute to vaccine hesitancy.

CONCLUSIONS

This paper provided an evidence-based communicable summary of VAERS. As the most trusted sources of vaccine information, health practitioners can use this summary to provide evidence-based vaccine information to vaccine decision-makers (patients/parents) and mitigate concerns over vaccine safety and AEs. In addition, we identified 15 potential cognitive biases that might affect the vaccination decision-making process and nudge people toward vaccine hesitancy. Any plan, intervention, and message to increase vaccination uptake should be modified to decrease the effect of these potential cognitive biases.

Vaccine Videos and Information Sharing: The Effects of Framing, Evidence Type, and Speaker Expertise

YouTube videos have been used to inform and misinform the public about the safety of vaccines related to health threats such as measles and COVID-19. Understanding how such videos can promote the sharing of accurate vaccine safety information is of the utmost importance if health researchers are to combat the spread of misinformation and encourage widespread uptake of vaccines. Through the lens of prospect theory, this study conducted a 2 (framing: loss v. gain) x 2 (evidence type: episodic v. thematic) x 2 (speaker expertise: expert v. non-expert) between-subject factorial experiment in which a sample of N = 400 US adults over the age of 18 recruited through MTurk were asked their intention to share vaccine safety information with others after watching a manipulated YouTube video. The results showed that loss framing was associated with perceived MMR severity which was, in turn, associated with the likelihood that participants would share MMR vaccine information with others, via any means. However, this process varied depending on the type of evidence delivered, and the expertise of the speaker. Results and limitations are discussed in the context of vaccine communication and social media.

Portrayals of Vaccination in Entertainment Television: A Content Analysis

Entertainment media have been found to influence viewers' health perceptions and behaviors, yet little is currently known about how vaccination, an issue that has become controversial, is being portrayed in fictional television. The present study combined constructs from the health belief model and entertainment theory to conduct a quantitative content analysis of 51 television episodes released in 2000 or after. Results indicate that vaccination is portrayed in a variety of different program types including, but not limited to, medical dramas. The tone of vaccination portrayals was mostly positive across the episodes examined. Episodes with a positive vaccination tone tended to have more information than those presenting vaccination negatively, but overall there was little information provided. Pro-vaccination characters tended to be cast as the protagonists in a main starring role, whereas anti-vaccination characters played supporting characters, typically as parents making vaccination decisions for their children. The majority of episodes featured anti-vaccination arguments, such as those perpetuating the link between vaccines and autism.

A Multi-platform Approach to Monitoring Negative Dominance for COVID-19 Vaccine-Related Information Online

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to test the appearance of negative dominance in COVID-19 vaccine-related information and activity online. We hypothesized that if negative dominance appeared, it would be a reflection of peaks in adverse events related to the vaccine, that negative content would attract more engagement on social media than other vaccine-related posts, and posts referencing adverse events related to COVID-19 vaccination would have a higher average toxicity score.

METHODS

We collected data using Google Trends for search behavior, CrowdTangle for social media data, and Media Cloud for media stories, and compared them against the dates of key adverse events related to COVID-19. We used Communalytic to analyze the toxicity of social media posts by platform and topic.

RESULTS

While our first hypothesis was partially supported, with peaks in search behavior for image and YouTube videos driven by adverse events, we did not find negative dominance in other types of searches or patterns of attention by news media or on social media.

CONCLUSION

We did not find evidence in our data to prove the negative dominance of adverse events related to COVID-19 vaccination on social media. Future studies should corroborate these findings and, if consistent, focus on explaining why this may be the case.

Correcting HPV Vaccination Misinformation Online: Evaluating the HPV Vaccination NOW Social Media Campaign

The human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine provides protection from six HPV-related cancers. Approximately half of South Carolina adolescents have not completed the vaccination series, representing a missed opportunity to prevent cancer. The HPV Vaccination NOW: This is Our Moment social media campaign is an initiative of the South Carolina Cancer Alliance (SCCA) and Hollings Cancer Center at the Medical University of South Carolina (MUSC). This statewide social media campaign aimed to increase parental awareness of and build vaccine confidence around HPV vaccination in S.C. The ten-week campaign was strategically implemented between June and August 2019 to encourage HPV vaccination at back-to-school medical appointments. A process evaluation showed that the campaign resulted in over 370,000 total impressions, reached over 33,000 individuals, and culminated with over 1122 followers. There were over 2700 engagements on Facebook and Twitter. A qualitative content analysis indicated that pro-vaccine and anti-vaccine comments were dominated by personal stories. Comments promoting misinformation about the HPV vaccine were often countered through peer-to-peer dialogue. Findings suggest that creating opportunities for the target audience to engage with campaign messages effectively corrected misinformation.

Identifying and Analyzing Health-Related Themes in Disinformation Shared by Conservative and Liberal Russian Trolls on Twitter

To combat health disinformation shared online, there is a need to identify and characterize the prevalence of topics shared by trolls managed by individuals to promote discord. The current literature is limited to a few health topics and dominated by vaccination. The goal of this study is to identify and analyze the breadth of health topics discussed by left (liberal) and right (conservative) Russian trolls on Twitter. We introduce an automated framework based on mixed methods including both computational and qualitative techniques. Results suggest that Russian trolls discussed 48 health-related topics, ranging from diet to abortion. Out of the 48 topics, there was a significant difference (p-value ≤ 0.004) between left and right trolls based on 17 topics. Hillary Clinton's health during the 2016 election was the most popular topic for right trolls, who discussed this topic significantly more than left trolls. Mental health was the most popular topic for left trolls, who discussed this topic significantly more than right trolls. This study shows that health disinformation is a global public health threat on social media for a considerable number of health topics. This study can be beneficial for researchers who are interested in political disinformation and health monitoring, communication, and promotion on social media by showing health information shared by Russian trolls.

Methods for Social Media Monitoring Related to Vaccination: Systematic Scoping Review

Background

Social media has changed the communication landscape, exposing individuals to an ever-growing amount of information while also allowing them to create and share content. Although vaccine skepticism is not new, social media has amplified public concerns and facilitated their spread globally. Multiple studies have been conducted to monitor vaccination discussions on social media. However, there is currently insufficient evidence on the best methods to perform social media monitoring.

Objective

The aim of this study was to identify the methods most commonly used for monitoring vaccination-related topics on different social media platforms, along with their effectiveness and limitations.

Methods

A systematic scoping review was conducted by applying a comprehensive search strategy to multiple databases in December 2018. The articles’ titles, abstracts, and full texts were screened by two reviewers using inclusion and exclusion criteria. After data extraction, a descriptive analysis was performed to summarize the methods used to monitor and analyze social media, including data extraction tools; ethical considerations; search strategies; periods monitored; geolocalization of content; and sentiments, content, and reach analyses.

Results

This review identified 86 articles on social media monitoring of vaccination, most of which were published after 2015. Although 35 out of the 86 studies used manual browser search tools to collect data from social media, this was time-consuming and only allowed for the analysis of small samples compared to social media application program interfaces or automated monitoring tools. Although simple search strategies were considered less precise, only 10 out of the 86 studies used comprehensive lists of keywords (eg, with hashtags or words related to specific events or concerns). Partly due to privacy settings, geolocalization of data was extremely difficult to obtain, limiting the possibility of performing country-specific analyses. Finally, 20 out of the 86 studies performed trend or content analyses, whereas most of the studies (70%, 60/86) analyzed sentiments toward vaccination. Automated sentiment analyses, performed using leverage, supervised machine learning, or automated software, were fast and provided strong and accurate results. Most studies focused on negative (n=33) and positive (n=31) sentiments toward vaccination, and may have failed to capture the nuances and complexity of emotions around vaccination. Finally, 49 out of the 86 studies determined the reach of social media posts by looking at numbers of followers and engagement (eg, retweets, shares, likes).

Conclusions

Social media monitoring still constitutes a new means to research and understand public sentiments around vaccination. A wide range of methods are currently used by researchers. Future research should focus on evaluating these methods to offer more evidence and support the development of social media monitoring as a valuable research design.

"Down the Rabbit Hole" of Vaccine Misinformation on YouTube: Network Exposure Study

Background

Social media platforms such as YouTube are hotbeds for the spread of misinformation about vaccines.

Objective

The aim of this study was to explore how individuals are exposed to antivaccine misinformation on YouTube based on whether they start their viewing from a keyword-based search or from antivaccine seed videos.

Methods

Four networks of videos based on YouTube recommendations were collected in November 2019. Two search networks were created from provaccine and antivaccine keywords to resemble goal-oriented browsing. Two seed networks were constructed from conspiracy and antivaccine expert seed videos to resemble direct navigation. Video contents and network structures were analyzed using the network exposure model.

Results

Viewers are more likely to encounter antivaccine videos through direct navigation starting from an antivaccine video than through goal-oriented browsing. In the two seed networks, provaccine videos, antivaccine videos, and videos containing health misinformation were all found to be more likely to lead to more antivaccine videos.

Conclusions

YouTube has boosted the search rankings of provaccine videos to combat the influence of antivaccine information. However, when viewers are directed to antivaccine videos on YouTube from another site, the recommendation algorithm is still likely to expose them to additional antivaccine information.

What Do Social Media Influencers Say about Health? A Theory-Driven Content Analysis of Top Ten Health Influencers' Posts on Sina Weibo

Social media health influencers play an increasingly important role in disseminating health-related information to the public. To explore how health influencers in China communicate with their followers, we conducted a content analysis of the top ten health influencers' posts (n = 1000) on Sina Weibo guided by the Extended Parallel Processing Model (EPPM) and the transportation theory. These posts were coded in terms of demographic information, topics, message properties (informative, persuasive, and interactive), EPPM variables, and types of evidence (statistical and narrative) used. Results showed that these influencers had a clear emphasis on women's health (OB/GYN diseases and risks related to pregnancy and childcare) and beauty and skincare (in terms of risks and benefits). Overall, they used low fear appeal and high efficacy messages. However, messages containing efficacy information were less likely to be liked. These influencers relied heavily on narrative evidence; however, there was no significant relationship between the use of either narrative or statistical evidence and the number of likes. Differences in the communication strategies in posts about different diseases did exist but were not prevalent.

Bridging polarised Twitter discussions: the interactions of the users in the middle

Purpose

The purpose of the paper is to analyse the interactions of bridging users in Twitter discussions about vaccination.

Design/methodology/approach

Conversational threads were collected through filtering the Twitter stream using keywords and the most active participants in the conversations. Following data collection and anonymisation of tweets and user profiles, a retweet network was created to find users bridging the main clusters. Four conversations were selected, ranging from 456 to 1,983 tweets long, and then analysed through content analysis.

Findings

Although different opinions met in the discussions, a consensus was rarely built. Many sub-threads involved insults and criticism, and participants seemed not interested in shifting their positions. However, examples of reasoned discussions were also found.

Originality/value

The study analyses conversations on Twitter, which is rarely studied. The focus on the interactions of bridging users adds to the uniqueness of the paper.

The Crisis of Public Health and Infodemic: Analyzing Belief Structure of Fake News about COVID-19 Pandemic

False information about COVID-19 is being produced and disseminated on a large scale, impeding efforts to rapidly impose quarantines. Thus, in addition to the COVID-19 pandemic itself, an infodemic related with it is leading to social crises. This study therefore investigates who believes the misinformation that is being produced in the context of COVID-19. We choose two main factors—risk perception factor, so called psychometric paradigm, and communication factor—as independent variables that can affect belief in misinformation related to COVID-19. The results show that, among psychometric variables, perceived risk and stigma positively impact belief in fake news, whereas perceived benefit and trust have negative effects. Among communication factors, source credibility and the quantity of information reduce belief in fake news, whereas the credibility of information sources increases these beliefs. Stigma has the greatest explanatory power among the variables, followed by health status, heuristic information processing, trust, and subjective social class.

Kansas Family Physicians Perceptions of Parental Vaccination Hesitancy

Introduction

In the past few decades, patients expressing the idea that vaccines are unsafe or unneeded have been experienced increasingly by physicians and other healthcare providers. Discussions with patients regarding their reasons for vaccine refusals are important, as it may provide information that can be utilized in an intervention to increase vaccination rates and combat the spread of diseases that are making a resurgence in the United States. The main objective of this study was to explore the perceptions of family physicians as to why parents in Kansas may be vaccine hesitant.

Methods

An electronic survey was distributed to family physicians in the State of Kansas via the University of Kansas School of Medicine-Wichita Family Medicine Research and Data Information Office (FM RADIO). Several aspects of physician perceptions regarding patients’ vaccine hesitancy were measured in this study, including vaccines that are most often refused, reasons for refusing vaccinations, as well as what responses physicians employ when presented with vaccine concerns.

Results

The majority of physicians surveyed have experienced vaccine hesitancy or refusal in their practice, and the human papillomavirus (HPV) and flu vaccines were reported to be the primary vaccines refused for children. In addition, physicians reported frequently employing various practices in response to vaccine refusals, including requiring parents to sign a form (40%) and dismissing families from their practice (1.5%). Physician perceptions on the reasons as to why parents/guardians refuse vaccinations also were measured, and the most common response was that parents possess a fear of long-term complications for their children as a result of vaccines (74%). Additionally, the three most commonly refused vaccines were HPV, influenza, and measles, mumps, and rubella.

Conclusion

Physicians must not only deal with time constraints that vaccine hesitant discussions require, but also must try and implement discussions or interventions suited to the varying reasons why parents/guardians refuse vaccines to convince parents of their safety. The results suggested that vaccine refusals by parents/guardians seemed to be affecting Kansas family physicians’ clinics in more than one way. This study could be a useful tool to help physicians better understand why vaccine refusals occur and be able to combat unwarranted concerns about vaccines.

#Antivaccination on Instagram: A Computational Analysis of Hashtag Activism through Photos and Public Responses

A dramatic increase has been registered in the number of social media posts in photo form as well as in hashtag activism. Hashtags, which manifest thoughts and feelings clearly and concisely, originated on Twitter, where the length of a post is limited; their use, however, has expanded into other social media services, including Instagram. Hashtags, which make it easy to find and express support for posts of interest, have been widely used for online activism, although they have been criticized for fostering confirmation bias. Moreover, hashtag activism in photo form has been relatively understudied. This research analyzed Instagram photos with antivaccination hashtags as an example of hashtag activism through photos. In addition, we examined how the photo features were related to public response, which was manifested via engagement and comment sentiment. The results suggest that the photos which were categorized into “text” took the largest share. It was also found that the major way of claiming was to imprint key messages that persuade people not to vaccinate with remarks from professionals on photos and provide a source of supporting information in the post text with hashtags of antivaccine intention. Various photo features showed associations with engagement and comment sentiment, but the directions of correlation were usually the opposite: these results suggest that engagement and comment sentiment are separate domains that reveal different public responses.

Moving past the vaccine/autism controversy - to examine potential vaccine neurological harms

BACKGROUND

The vaccine/autism controversy has caused vast scientific and public confusion, and it has set back research and education into genuine vaccine-induced neurological disorders. The great strawman of autism has been so emphasized by the vaccine industry that it, and it alone, often appears in authoritative discussions of adverse effects of the MMR and other vaccines. By dismissing the chimerical vaccine/autism controversy, vaccine defenders often dismiss all genuinely neurological aftereffects of the MMR (measles, mumps, and rubella) and other vaccines, including well-documented events, such as relatively rare cases of encephalopathy and encephalitis.

OBJECTIVE

This report explains that autism is not a physical or neurological disorder. It is not caused by injury or disease of the brain. It is a developmental disorder that has no physical origins and no physical symptoms. It is extremely unlikely that vaccines are causing autism; but it is extremely likely that they are causing more neurological damage than currently appreciated, some of it resulting in psychosocial disabilities that can be confused with autism and other psychosocial disorders. This confusion between a developmental, psychosocial disorder and a physical neurological disease has played into the hands of interest groups who want to deny that vaccines have any neurological and associated neuropsychiatric effects.

METHODS

A review of the scientific literature, textbooks, and related media commentary is integrated with basic clinical knowledge.

RESULTS

This report shows how scientific sources have used the vaccine/autism controversy to avoid dealing with genuine neurological risks associated with vaccines and summarizes evidence that vaccines, including the MMR, can cause serious neurological disorders. Manufacturers have been allowed by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to gain vaccine approval without placebo-controlled clinical trials.

CONCLUSIONS

The misleading vaccine autism controversy must be set aside in favor of examining actual neurological harms associated with vaccines, including building on existing research that has been ignored. Manufacturers of vaccines must be required to conduct placebo-controlled clinical studies for existing vaccines and for government approval of new vaccines. Many probable or confirmed neurological adverse events occur within a few days or weeks after immunization and could be detected if the trials were sufficiently large. Contrary to current opinion, large, long-term placebo-controlled trials of existing and new vaccines would be relatively easy and safe to conduct.

#BeTheMatch: Assessing How Testimonials on Reddit Promote the Importance of Donating Bone Marrow

This study explores how sharing testimonials on the social media network Reddit may encourage individuals to donate bone marrow. The theory of planned behavior guided a quantitative content analysis of 1,015 Reddit comments about donation. Research questions asked how individuals post about donation and how Redditors engage with this content. Overall, comments addressed more positive than negative outcome, efficacy, and normative beliefs. Comments that discussed beliefs related to registering to donate and the process of donating received significantly higher engagement than other comments. Additionally, comments that included positive outcome beliefs related to registering, positive efficacy beliefs related to registering and donating, and positive normative beliefs related to donating received higher engagement than other comments. Results suggest testimonials may be most effective if they focus on behavior facilitators and if they present donation as a positive norm deviant behavior. Finally, the Reddit forums functioned as places for individuals to seek out and share information. Comments included calls to action and hyperlinks for health resources. This research reveals how organic conversations on Reddit may promote health information seeking and advocacy behavior adoption. Implications for the theory of planned behavior and the use of Reddit as a platform for health promotion are discussed.

When being positive might be negative: An analysis of Australian and New Zealand newspaper framing of vaccination post Australia's No Jab No Pay legislation

•

Positive frames of stories or statements are viewed by readers as persuasion.

•

People socially expect credible news media stories to be negatively framed.

•

Vaccine stories framed negatively may be deemed as more credible by readers.

•

Positively framed vaccination stories could be viewed as advertising or coercion.

Vaccination rates are an ongoing global concern. Many developing and developed countries have rates of vaccination below rates required for herd immunity, for differing reasons. One way in which to communicate information about vaccination to the wider public is via the use of the news media. Communication agenda-setting and framing theory generally hold that the news media sets the issues of importance to society and also tells us how we should think about those issues. Emphasis framing theory however, would suggest that positively-framed statements in the media may actually be viewed as persuasive in a coercing way, leading to resistance to the messages. Further, this theory claims that negative news media is viewed as more credible and therefore, more easily accepted. We were interested to explore the framing of news reports about vaccination and the potential effects this framing may have had on the wider public over the years 2016–2017 in both Australia and New Zealand (when changes in vaccination policy and publicity respectively were on the agenda). We undertook a content analysis of 197 articles and emphasis frame, type of message, and other variables recorded. In both Australia and New Zealand, the news media messages were predominately positively framed and yet the vaccination rates of New Zealand particularly (where no policy changes mandating vaccination took place) have been decreasing. We suggest the media emphasis on positive vaccination reporting may be having the opposite effect of engendering resistance to vaccination within those who are vaccine-hesitant.

Mining HPV Vaccine Knowledge Structures of Young Adults From Reddit Using Distributional Semantics and Pathfinder Networks

The human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine protects adolescents and young adults from 9 high-risk HPV virus types that cause 90% of cervical and anal cancers and 70% of oropharyngeal cancers. This study extends our previous research analyzing online content concerning the HPV vaccination in social media platforms used by young adults, in which we used Pathfinder network scaling and methods of distributional semantics to characterize differences in knowledge organization reflected in consumer- and expert-generated online content. The current study extends this approach to evaluate HPV vaccine perceptions among young adults who populate Reddit, a major social media platform. We derived Pathfinder networks from estimates of semantic relatedness obtained by learning word embeddings from Reddit posts and compared these to networks derived from human expert estimation of the relationship between key concepts. Results revealed that users of Reddit, predominantly comprising young adults in the vaccine catch up age-group 18 through 26 years of age, perceived the HPV vaccine domain from a virus-framed perspective that could impact their lifestyle choices and that their awareness of the HPV vaccine for cancer prevention is also lacking. Further differences in knowledge structures were elucidated, with implications for future health communication initiatives.

Regulating the Fast-Food Landscape: Canadian News Media Representation of the Healthy Menu Choices Act

With the rapid rise of fast food consumption in Canada, Ontario was the first province to legislate menu labelling requirements via the enactment of the Healthy Menu Choice Act (HMCA). As the news media plays a significant role in policy debates and the agenda for policymakers and the public, the purpose of this mixed-methods study was to clarify the manner in which the news media portrayed the strengths and critiques of the Act, and its impact on members of the community, including consumers and stakeholders. Drawing on data from Canadian regional and national news outlets, the major findings highlight that, although the media reported that the HMCA was a positive step forward, this was tempered by critiques concerning the ineffectiveness of using caloric labelling as the sole measure of health, and its predicted low impact on changing consumption patterns on its own. Furthermore, the news media were found to focus accountability for healthier eating choices largely on the individual, with very little consideration of the role of the food industry or the social and structural determinants that affect food choice. A strong conflation of health, weight and calories was apparent, with little acknowledgement of the implications of menu choice for chronic illness. The analysis demonstrates that the complex factors associated with food choice were largely unrecognized by the media, including the limited extent to which social, cultural, political and corporate determinants of unhealthy choices were taken into account as the legislation was developed. Greater recognition of these factors by the media concerning the HMCA may evoke more meaningful and long-term change for health and food choices.

Twitter message types, health beliefs, and vaccine attitudes during the 2015 measles outbreak in California

BACKGROUND

Social media not only provide platforms for the public to obtain information about a disease but also allow them to share their opinions and experiences about it.

METHODS

This study analyzed 3000 tweets systematically selected from over 1 million tweets posted during the 2015 California measles outbreak.

RESULTS

News updates were the most tweeted messages (41.4%), followed by personal opinions (33.7%), resources (19.4%), personal experiences (2.5%), and questions (1.6%). Susceptibility was the most discussed health belief (21.8%), followed by cues to action (18.9%) and severity (13.0%). Individuals were significantly more likely to discuss severity. Nonprofit organizations were significantly more likely to offer cues to action than other user types, and media were less likely to include cues to action than other user types. Pro-vaccine tweets were more likely to contain links to traditional mainstream media sources such as newspapers and magazines, and anti-vaccine tweets were more likely to link to emerging news websites.

CONCLUSIONS

Understanding who posts what on social media during an infectious disease outbreak allows public health agencies to better assess the public's attitudes, sentiments, and needs in order to provide timely and effective information.

Screening for and management of comorbidities after a nurse-led program: results of a 3-year longitudinal study in 769 established rheumatoid arthritis patients

Background/purpose

Cardiovascular (CV) risk, cancer, infections and osteoporosis should be screened for in rheumatoid arthritis (RA). The objective was to assess 3-year effects of a nurse visit for comorbidity counselling.

Methods

This was an open long-term (3 years) extension of the Comorbidities and Education in Rheumatoid Arthritis 6-month randomised controlled trial in which patients with definite, stable RA were visiting a nurse for comorbidity counselling. Comorbidity status was assessed and nurses provided advice on screening and management, at baseline and 3 years later. A score was developed to quantify comorbidity screening and management: 0–100, where lower scores indicate better screening and management. The score was compared between baseline and 3-year assessment using a Wilcoxon test for paired data.

Results

Of the 970 recruited patients, 776 (80%) were followed-up at 2–4 years and 769 (79%) had available data for comorbidities at both time points: mean (±SD) age 58 (±11) years and mean disease duration 14 (±10) years; 614 (80%) were women, the mean Disease Activity Score 28 was 3.0±1.3, and 538 (70%) were receiving a biologic. At baseline, the mean comorbidity screening score was 36.6 (±19.9) and it improved at 3 years to 24.3 (±17.8) (p<0.0001), thus with a relative improvement of 33% (improvement of 12 points). CV risk screening, vaccination status and bone densitometry performance improved the most.

Conclusions

Comorbidity screening was suboptimal but improved notably over 3 years, after a nurse-led programme aiming at checking systematically for comorbidity screening and giving patient advice. This long-term efficacy pleads in favour of nurse-led interventions to better address comorbidities in RA.

Trial registration number

NCT01315652

Communication issues in nutritional observational research

Observational epidemiological studies involving foods and nutrients often attract great attention from both the press and the public as they involve substances that are part of the daily lives of millions of individuals. In the digital era, findings of this research can be disseminated to very large audiences almost instantaneously, informing health beliefs and potentially triggering lifestyle changes. In this context, communication of results from observational nutritional epidemiology often involves specific issues that may limit the accuracy of the information ultimately being delivered to the public. In this narrative review we discuss some of these issues, with a special attention to the selective reporting of research studies by the media, the presentation of study findings as if they were free of bias, the reporting of inconsistent study results, and the issues related to the real-life uptake of research findings presented in the press. Collaborative efforts by all stakeholders involved in the dissemination process may help ameliorate this situation, and with this purpose we discuss some innovative approaches that may help reduce these issues.