Adverse Mentions, Negative Sentiment, and Emotions in COVID-19 Vaccine Tweets and Their Association with Vaccination Uptake: Global Comparison of 192 Countries

Association between Covid-19 sources of information, beliefs, and vaccination rates: an EU-wide survey

BACKGROUND

Misinformation hampers vaccine uptake. The European Union (EU) employed a coordinated effort to curb misinformation during the Covid-19 pandemic. In this context, we investigated relationships between sources of information, vaccine safety/effectiveness, satisfaction with government vaccination strategy, and vaccination intent.

METHODS

We used cross-sectional survey data (May 2021) from Flash Eurobarometer 494, a population-adjusted dataset comprised of a representative sample of those ≥15 years from 27 EU nations. We employed a latent class analysis to create clusters of information sources as the independent variable and beliefs in vaccine safety/efficacy, satisfaction with government vaccination strategy, and vaccine intent as four outcome variables. We first estimated the association between source clusters and each of the first three outcomes separately. Then, using these three as intermediate variables, we employed structural equation modeling to estimate the relationship between sources and vaccine intent. We adjusted for individual and country-level variables.

RESULTS

Among 23 012 respondents, four clusters of information sources emerged: (1) national authorities/health professionals (n = 9602; 42%), (2) mostly health professionals (6184; 27%), (3) mixed (n = 1705; 17%) and (4) social media/family/friends (n = 5524; 24%). Using cluster (3) as the referent, we found decreasing odds of beliefs in vaccine safety/effectiveness, satisfaction and vaccine intent across clusters (1), (2) and (4), respectively. Demographics played a role.

CONCLUSION

In the context of the Covid pandemic, these results provide the first EU-wide estimates of the association between sources of information about vaccine safety/effectiveness, satisfaction and vaccine intent. The coordinated approach promulgated by the EU to minimize misinformation provides a model for managing future pandemics.

Sentiment Analysis on Twitter: Role of Healthcare Professionals in the Global Conversation during the AstraZeneca Vaccine Suspension

The vaccines against COVID-19 arrived in Spain at the end of 2020 along with vaccination campaigns which were not free of controversy. The debate was fueled by the adverse effects following the administration of the AstraZeneca-Oxford (AZ) vaccine in some European countries, eventually leading to its temporary suspension as a precautionary measure. In the present study, we analyze the healthcare professionals' conversations, sentiment, polarity, and intensity on social media during two periods in 2021: the one closest to the suspension of the AZ vaccine and the same time frame 30 days later. We also analyzed whether there were differences between Spain and the rest of the world. Results: The negative sentiment ratio was higher (U = 87; p = 0.048) in Spain in March (Med = 0.396), as well as the daily intensity (U = 86; p = 0.044; Med = 0.440). The opposite happened with polarity (U = 86; p = 0.044), which was higher in the rest of the world (Med = -0.264). Conclusions: There was a general increase in messages and interactions between March and April. In Spain, there was a higher incidence of negative messages and intensity compared to the rest of the world during the March period that disappeared in April. Finally, it was found that the dissemination of messages linked to negative emotions towards vaccines against COVID-19 from healthcare professionals contributed to a negative approach to primary prevention campaigns in the middle of the pandemic.

Cancer and COVID-19 Vaccines on Twitter:The Voice and Vaccine Attitude of Cancer Community

We investigate social media discourses on the relationship between cancer and COVID-19 vaccines focusing on the key textual topics, themes reflecting the voice of cancer community, authors who contribute to the discourse, and valence toward vaccines. We analyzed 6,427 tweets about cancer and COVID-19 vaccines, posted from when vaccines were approved in the U.S. (December 2020) to the February 2022. We mixed quantitative text mining, manual coding and statistical analysis, and inductive qualitative thematic analysis. Nearly 16% of the tweets posted by a cancer community member mentioned about refusal or delay of their vaccination at the state/local level during the initial rollout despite the CDC's recommendation to prioritize adults with high-risk medical conditions. Most tweets posted by cancer patients (pro = 82.4% vs. anti = 5.1%) and caregivers (pro = 89.2% vs. anti = 4.2%) showed positive valence toward vaccines and advocated for vaccine uptake increase among cancer patients and the general population. Vaccine hesitancy, self-reported adverse events, and COVID-19 disruption of cancer treatment also appeared as key themes. The cancer community called for actions to improve vaccination procedures to become safe and accessible especially for elderly cancer patients, develop COVID-19 vaccines suitable for varying type, stage, and treatment of cancer, and advance cancer vaccines. Future research should continue surveilling conversations around continuous impacts of COVID-19 interference with the cancer control continuum, beyond vaccination, focusing on the voice and concern of cancer community.

Changes in Public Sentiment under the Background of Major Emergencies-Taking the Shanghai Epidemic as an Example

The occurrence of major health events can have a significant impact on public mood and mental health. In this study, we selected Shanghai during the 2019 novel coronavirus pandemic as a case study and Weibo texts as the data source. The ERNIE pre-training model was used to classify the text data into five emotional categories: gratitude, confidence, sadness, anger, and no emotion. The changes in public sentiment and potential influencing factors were analyzed with the emotional sequence diagram method. We also examined the causal relationship between the epidemic and public sentiment, as well as positive and negative emotions. The study found: (1) public sentiment during the epidemic was primarily affected by public behavior, government behavior, and the severity of the epidemic. (2) From the perspective of time series changes, the changes in public emotions during the epidemic were divided into emotional fermentation, emotional climax, and emotional chaos periods. (3) There was a clear causal relationship between the epidemic and the changes in public emotions, and the impact on negative emotions was greater than that of positive emotions. Additionally, positive emotions had a certain inhibitory effect on negative emotions.