Addressing Antivaccine Sentiment on Public Social Media Forums Through Web-Based Conversations Based on Motivational Interviewing Techniques: Observational Study

BACKGROUND

Health misinformation shared on social media can have negative health consequences; yet, there is a dearth of field research testing interventions to address health misinformation in real time, digitally, and in situ on social media.

OBJECTIVE

We describe a field study of a pilot program of "infodemiologists" trained with evidence-informed intervention techniques heavily influenced by principles of motivational interviewing. Here we provide a detailed description of the nature of infodemiologists' interventions on posts sharing misinformation about COVID-19 vaccines, present an initial evaluation framework for such field research, and use available engagement metrics to quantify the impact of these in-group messengers on the web-based threads on which they are intervening.

METHODS

We monitored Facebook (Meta Platforms, Inc) profiles of news organizations marketing to 3 geographic regions (Newark, New Jersey; Chicago, Illinois; and central Texas). Between December 2020 and April 2021, infodemiologists intervened in 145 Facebook news posts that generated comments containing either false or misleading information about vaccines or overt antivaccine sentiment. Engagement (emojis plus replies) data were collected on Facebook news posts, the initial comment containing misinformation (level 1 comment), and the infodemiologist's reply (level 2 reply comment). A comparison-group evaluation design was used, with numbers of replies, emoji reactions, and engagements for level 1 comments compared with the median metrics of matched comments using the Wilcoxon signed rank test. Level 2 reply comments (intervention) were also benchmarked against the corresponding metric of matched reply comments (control) using the Wilcoxon signed rank test (paired at the level 1 comment level). Infodemiologists' level 2 reply comments (intervention) and matched reply comments (control) were further compared using 3 Poisson regression models.

RESULTS

In total, 145 interventions were conducted on 132 Facebook news posts. The level 1 comments received a median of 3 replies, 3 reactions, and 7 engagements. The matched comments received a median of 1.5 (median of IQRs 3.75) engagements. Infodemiologists made 322 level 2 reply comments, precipitating 189 emoji reactions and a median of 0.5 (median of IQRs IQR 0) engagements. The matched reply comments received a median of 1 (median of IQRs 2.5) engagement. Compared to matched comments, level 1 comments received more replies, emoji reactions, and engagements. Compared to matched reply comments, level 2 reply comments received fewer and narrower ranges of replies, reactions, and engagements, except for the median comparison for replies.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, empathy-first communication strategies based on motivational interviewing garnered less engagement relative to matched controls. One possible explanation is that our interventions quieted contentious, misinformation-laden threads about vaccines on social media. This work reinforces research on accuracy nudges and cyberbullying interventions that also reduce engagement. More research leveraging field studies of real-time interventions is needed, yet data transparency by technology platforms will be essential to facilitate such experiments.

Effects of the COVID-19 Pandemic on the Decision and Doubts About Vaccination in Catalonia: Online Cross-sectional Questionnaire

BACKGROUND

Hesitancy to get vaccinated during the COVID-19 pandemic may decrease vaccination coverage and facilitate the occurrence of local or global outbreaks.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to analyze the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic in Catalonia on 3 aspects: the decision to get vaccinated against COVID-19, changes in opinion about vaccination in general, and the decision to get vaccinated against other diseases.

METHODS

We performed an observational study with the population of Catalonia aged 18 years or over, obtaining information through a self-completed questionnaire in electronic format. Differences between groups were determined using the chi-square test, Mann-Whitney U test, or the Student t test.

RESULTS

We analyzed the answers from 1188 respondents, of which 870 were women, 47.0% (558/1187) had sons or daughters under the age of 14 years, and 71.7% (852/1188) had studied at university. Regarding vaccination, 16.3% (193/1187) stated that they had refused a vaccine on some occasion, 76.3% (907/1188) totally agreed with vaccines, 1.9% (23/1188) were indifferent, and 3.5% (41/1188) and 1.2% (14/1188) slightly or totally disagreed with vaccination, respectively. As a result of the pandemic, 90.8% (1069/1177) stated that they would get vaccinated against COVID-19 when they are asked, while 9.2% (108/1177) stated the opposite. A greater intention to get vaccinated was observed among women; people older than 50 years; people without children under 15 years of age; people with beliefs, culture, or family in favor of vaccination; respondents who had not previously rejected other vaccines, were totally in favor of vaccines, or had not increased their doubts about vaccination; and respondents who had not changed their decision about vaccines as a result of the pandemic. Finally, 30.3% (359/1183) reported an increase in their doubts regarding vaccination, and 13.0% (154/1182) stated that they had changed their decision about routinely recommended vaccines as a result of the pandemic.

CONCLUSIONS

The population studied was predominantly in favor of vaccination; however, the percentage of people specifically rejecting vaccination against COVID-19 was high. As a result of the pandemic, we detected an increase in doubts about vaccines. Although the final decision about vaccination did not primarily change, some of the respondents did change their opinion about routine vaccinations. This seed of doubt about vaccines may be worrisome as we aim to maintain high vaccination coverage.

The Prevalence, Features, Influencing Factors, and Solutions for COVID-19 Vaccine Misinformation: Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

During the COVID-19 pandemic, infodemic spread even more rapidly than the pandemic itself. The COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy has been prevalent worldwide and hindered pandemic exiting strategies. Misinformation around COVID-19 vaccines is a vital contributor to vaccine hesitancy. However, no evidence systematically summarized COVID-19 vaccine misinformation.

OBJECTIVE

This review aims to synthesize the global evidence on misinformation related to COVID-19 vaccines, including its prevalence, features, influencing factors, impacts, and solutions for combating misinformation.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review by searching 5 peer-reviewed databases (PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus, and EBSCO). We included original articles that investigated misinformation related to COVID-19 vaccines and were published in English from January 1, 2020, to August 18, 2022. We excluded publications that did not cover or focus on COVID-19 vaccine misinformation. The Appraisal tool for Cross-Sectional Studies, version 2 of the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials (RoB 2), and Critical Appraisal Skills Programme Checklist were used to assess the study quality. The review was guided by PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) and registered with PROSPERO (CRD42021288929).

RESULTS

Of the 8864 studies identified, 91 observational studies and 11 interventional studies met the inclusion criteria. Misinformation around COVID-19 vaccines covered conspiracy, concerns on vaccine safety and efficacy, no need for vaccines, morality, liberty, and humor. Conspiracy and safety concerns were the most prevalent misinformation. There was a great variation in misinformation prevalence, noted among 2.5%-55.4% in the general population and 6.0%-96.7% in the antivaccine/vaccine hesitant groups from survey-based studies, and in 0.1%-41.3% on general online data and 0.5%-56% on antivaccine/vaccine hesitant data from internet-based studies. Younger age, lower education and economic status, right-wing and conservative ideology, and having psychological problems enhanced beliefs in misinformation. The content, format, and source of misinformation influenced its spread. A 5-step framework was proposed to address vaccine-related misinformation, including identifying misinformation, regulating producers and distributors, cutting production and distribution, supporting target audiences, and disseminating trustworthy information. The debunking messages/videos were found to be effective in several experimental studies.

CONCLUSIONS

Our review provides comprehensive and up-to-date evidence on COVID-19 vaccine misinformation and helps responses to vaccine infodemic in future pandemics.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42021288929; https://tinyurl.com/2prejtfa.

during the COVID-19 Pandemic after Vaccine Rollout

Even though vaccination is the most effective measure against COVID-19 infections, vaccine rollout efforts have been hampered by growing anti-vaccine attitudes. Based on current knowledge, we identified three domains (beliefs, discrimination, and news) as our correlates of primary interest to examine the association with anti-vaccine attitudes. This is one of the first studies to examine key correlates of anti-vaccine attitudes during the critical early stages of vaccine implementation in the United States. An online survey was administered in May 2021 to a non-representative, nationally based sample of adults (N = 789). Using multivariable logistic regression analysis, we found that individuals who expressed worry about COVID-19 (OR = 0.34, 95% CI 0.21, 0.55) and had greater knowledge of COVID-19 (OR = 0.50, 95% CI 0.25, 0.99) were less likely to hold anti-vaccine attitudes. Conversely, individuals who held stigmatizing views of COVID-19 (OR = 2.47, 95% CI 1.53, 3.99), had experienced racial discrimination (OR = 2.14, 95% CI 1.25, 3.67) and discrimination related to COVID-19 (OR = 2.84, 95% CI 1.54, 5.24), and who had been watching Fox News (OR = 3.95, 95% CI 2.61, 5.97) were more likely to hold anti-vaccine attitudes. These findings suggest COVID-19 beliefs, experiences of discrimination, and news sources should be considered when designing targeted approaches to address the anti-vaccine movement.

Antecedents of Vaccine Hesitancy in WEIRD and East Asian Contexts

Following decreasing vaccination rates over the last two decades, understanding the roots of vaccine hesitancy has become a public health priority. Vaccine hesitancy is linked to scientifically unfounded fears around the MMR vaccine and autism which are often fuelled by misinformation spread on social media. To counteract the effects of misinformation about vaccines and in particular the falling vaccination rates, much research has focused on identifying the antecedents of vaccine hesitancy. As antecedents of vaccine hesitancy are contextually dependent, a one-size-fits-all approach is unlikely to be successful in non-WEIRD (Western, Educated, Industrialised, Rich, and Democratic) populations, and even in certain (non-typical) WEIRD sub-populations. Successful interventions to reduce vaccine hesitancy must be based on understanding of the specific context. To identify potential contextual differences in the antecedents of vaccine hesitancy, we review research from three non-WEIRD populations in East Asia, and three WEIRD sub-populations. We find that regardless of the context, mistrust seems to be the key factor leading to vaccine hesitancy. However, the object of mistrust varies across WEIRD and non-WEIRD populations, and across WEIRD subgroups suggesting that effective science communication must be mindful of these differences.

Anti-vaccination attitudes are associated with less analytical and more intuitive reasoning

Online anti-vaccination rhetoric has produced far reaching negative health consequences. Persons who endorse anti-vaccination attitudes may employ less analytical reasoning when problem solving. Considering limitations in previous research, we used an online web-based survey (n = 760; mean age = 47.69; 388 males, 372 females) to address this question. Analytical reasoning was negatively correlated with anti-vaccination attitudes (r = -.18, p < .0001). This relationship remained significant after statistically controlling for potential confounders, including age, sex, education, and religiosity (r = -.16, p < .0001). We hope that elucidating the cognitive, non-information-based aspects of anti-vaccination attitudes will help to guide effective educational interventions aimed at improving public health in the future.

Talking to NICU Parents About Vaccination

NICU parents are stressed, and adding vaccinations into the discussion can cause resistance. Their baby is already enduring pain with the various interventions keeping him alive, so a parent is likely to balk at the very mention of vaccinations. Enter Mary Koslap-Petraco, DNP, PPCNP-BC, CPNP, FAANP, who works with parents all the time around this issue. I interviewed her about how to help "vaccine-hesitant" parents come around in complying with vaccinations while in the NICU.

Psychological Determinants of COVID-19 Vaccine Acceptance among Healthcare Workers in Kuwait: A Cross-Sectional Study Using the 5C and Vaccine Conspiracy Beliefs Scales

Acceptance of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination appears as a decisive factor necessary to control the ongoing pandemic. Healthcare workers (HCWs) are among the highest risk groups for infection. The current study aimed to evaluate COVID-19 vaccine acceptance among HCWs in Kuwait, with identification of the psychological determinants of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy. The study was conducted using an online anonymous survey distributed between 18 March 2021 and 29 March 2021. The sampling strategy was convenience-based depending on chain-referral sampling. Psychological determinants of COVID-19 vaccine acceptance were assessed using the 5C subscales and the Vaccine Conspiracy Beliefs Scale (VCBS). The total number of study participants was 1019, with the largest group being physicians (28.7%), pharmacists (20.2%), dentists (16.7%), and nurses (12.5%). The overall rate for COVID-19 vaccine acceptance was 83.3%, with 9.0% who were not willing to accept vaccination and 7.7% who were unsure. The highest rate for COVID-19 vaccine acceptance was seen among dentists (91.2%) and physicians (90.4%), while the lowest rate was seen among nurses (70.1%; p < 0.001). A higher level of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy was found among females, participants with a lower educational level, and HCWs in the private sector. A preference for mRNA vaccine technology and Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine was found among the majority of participants (62.6% and 69.7%, respectively). COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy was significantly linked to the embrace of vaccine conspiracy beliefs. The highest 5C psychological predictors of COVID-19 vaccine acceptance were high levels of collective responsibility and confidence, and lower levels of constraints and calculation. The VCBS and 5C subscales (except the calculation subscale) showed acceptable levels of predicting COVID-19 vaccine acceptance based on receiver operating characteristic analyses. The participants who depended on social media platforms, TV programs, and news releases as their main sources of knowledge about COVID-19 vaccines showed higher rates of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy. An overall satisfactory level of COVID-19 vaccine acceptance was seen among HCWs in Kuwait, which was among the highest rates reported globally. However; higher levels of vaccine hesitancy were observed among certain groups (females, nurses and laboratory workers, HCWs in the private sector), which should be targeted with more focused awareness programs. HCWs in Kuwait can play a central role in educating their patients and the general public about the benefits of COVID-19 vaccination to halt the spread of SARS-CoV-2, considering the high rates of vaccine hesitancy observed among the general public in Kuwait and the Middle East.

Faster than warp speed: early attention to COVD-19 by anti-vaccine groups on Facebook

Background

The unprecedented rapid development of COVID-19 vaccines has faced SARS-CoV- (COVID-19) vaccine hesitancy, which is partially fueled by the misinformation and conspiracy theories propagated by anti-vaccine groups on social media. Research is needed to better understand the early COVID-19 anti-vaccine activities on social media.

Methods

This study chronicles the social media posts concerning COVID-19 and COVID-19 vaccines by leading anti-vaccine groups (Dr Tenpenny on Vaccines, the National Vaccine Information Center [NVIC] the Vaccination Information Network [VINE]) and Vaccine Machine in the early months of the COVID-19 pandemic (February–May 2020).

Results

Analysis of 2060 Facebook posts showed that anti-vaccine groups were discussing COVID-19 in the first week of February 2020 and were specifically discussing COVID-19 vaccines by mid-February 2020. COVID-19 posts by NVIC were more widely disseminated and showed greater influence than non-COVID-19 posts. Early COVID-19 posts concerned mistrust of vaccine safety and conspiracy theories.

Conclusion

Major anti-vaccine groups were sowing seeds of doubt on Facebook weeks before the US government launched its vaccine development program ‘Operation Warp Speed’. Early anti-vaccine misinformation campaigns outpaced public health messaging and hampered the rollout of COVID-19 vaccines.

Understanding why healthcare workers refuse the flu vaccine

Background

Vaccination is one of the most effective interventions used to reduce infections. Nonetheless, concerns and misconceptions about vaccines have resulted in an increased rate of refusal of vaccination among healthcare workers (HCWs) and within the general population.

Aim/ Objective

To understand the factors that underlie vaccination-refusal.

Methods

A questionnaire was given to the HCWs in the inpatient area of an acute London hospital during May 2019. The sample was one of convenience, i.e. the wards where the principle investigator covered. All staff were approached: 306 in total completed the questionnaire.

Findings/results

In total, 212 (69.28%) healthcare professionals had the flu vaccine during the 2018-2019 campaign, 94 (30.62%) did not have the flu vaccine and 37 (39.36%) of the HCWs that did not receive the flu vaccine reported they had previously a bad reaction following administration of the vaccine.

Discussion

This report will provide the Trust and other healthcare settings with information integrating the disconnection between misconceptions and vaccination knowledge, which may inform practical interventions to address the challenges of vaccination in future campaigns. Increasing HCWs' knowledge of flu vaccine side effects could address this and may increase rates of vaccination compliance.

[The basics of health educational activities concerning vaccination in the Internet: "rational" advocates and "emotional" opponents]

The Internet and social media are becoming an influential source of information regarding health care issues, including vaccination. The profound analysis of the Russian Internet discourse on vaccination demonstrated that nowadays there is no clear-cut understanding of adequate strategy concerning informational policy in this direction. The article defines the principles of information policy for pro-vaccine attitudes spreading on the Internet.

METHODS

The sampling consisted of the Muscovites Internet messages containing the keywords 'vaccine' and 'vaccinations' and their derivatives. The analyzed period of data export is the first quarter of 2019. The size of uploading was 19948 messages, the random sample of 800 messages and 280 images was taken. Veterinary and spam messages were excluded.

RESULTS

The topic of vaccines in our sample is discussed more frequently by women (72%). The average age of participants is 35. The algorithms of vaccination, complications, and necessity of vaccines are the most frequently discussed issues. In our sample pro and contra vaccines messages are of equal percentage (42% and 41% respectively) and there are 17% of those who are in doubt. The key argument for contra vaccines is post-vaccination complications. The visual propaganda of vaccine supporters is aimed at the ideas of common good, rationality, scientific knowledge, they are using lots of humor, and it usually requires the context awareness. The opponents apply more personal and emotional approach. their values are family and personal experience, common sense. Their approach is more appealing to the 'common' reader.

CONCLUSION

The article describes strategies for argumentation and pro and contra vaccine propaganda on the Internet. The research offers its results to the segment users concerning their rational and emotional reactions. The work strategy with each group is proposed.

Complementary Medicine: Risks to Infants and Children

Complementary Alternative Medicine (CAM) that targets infants and children can place them at grave risk. Our plan is to review some of the major cases of CAM used by parents, and by unlicensed and even licensed health professionals. Complications from CAM are rarely the focus of regulatory bodies, or even the courts. Even regulated health professionals, who have profited by misrepresenting science-based evidence for treatment or prevention of disease, have been rarely sanctioned by their respective Boards or Colleges. This must change. In addition, there is a dire need for regulators, including the governments, who allow quack products and devices to be marketed in their respective countries, to prosecute them. Existing regulations must be coupled with more effective enforcement. Some of these cases have had a direct connection to me personally, while others are examples of just plain dangerous quackery.

Story and science: how providers and parents can utilize storytelling to combat anti-vaccine misinformation

With little or no evidence-based information to back up claims of vaccine danger, anti-vaccine activists have relied on the power of storytelling to infect an entire generation of parents with fear of and doubt about vaccines. These parent accounts of perceived vaccine injury, coupled with Andrew Wakefield's fraudulent research study linking the MMR vaccine to autism, created a substantial amount of vaccine hesitancy in new parents, which manifests in both vaccine refusal and the adoption of delayed vaccine schedules. The tools used by the medical and public health communities to counteract the anti-vaccine movement include statistics, research, and other evidence-based information, often delivered verbally or in the form of the CDC's Vaccine Information Statements. This approach may not be effective enough on its own to convince vaccine-hesitant parents that vaccines are safe, effective, and crucial to their children's health. Utilizing some of the storytelling strategies used by the anti-vaccine movement, in addition to evidence-based vaccine information, could potentially offer providers, public health officials, and pro-vaccine parents an opportunity to mount a much stronger defense against anti-vaccine messaging.