Negative COVID-19 Vaccine Information on Twitter: Content Analysis.

IF 3.5 Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES JMIR infodemiology Pub Date : 2022-08-29 eCollection Date: 2022-07-01 DOI:10.2196/38485
Niko Yiannakoulias, J Connor Darlington, Catherine E Slavik, Grant Benjamin
{"title":"Negative COVID-19 Vaccine Information on Twitter: Content Analysis.","authors":"Niko Yiannakoulias,&nbsp;J Connor Darlington,&nbsp;Catherine E Slavik,&nbsp;Grant Benjamin","doi":"10.2196/38485","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Social media platforms, such as Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, and YouTube, have a role in spreading anti-vaccine opinion and misinformation. Vaccines have been an important component of managing the COVID-19 pandemic, so content that discourages vaccination is generally seen as a concern to public health. However, not all negative information about vaccines is explicitly anti-vaccine, and some of it may be an important part of open communication between public health experts and the community.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>This research aimed to determine the frequency of negative COVID-19 vaccine information on Twitter in the first 4 months of 2021.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We manually coded 7306 tweets sampled from a large sampling frame of tweets related to COVID-19 and vaccination collected in early 2021. We also coded the geographic location and mentions of specific vaccine producers. We compared the prevalence of anti-vaccine and negative vaccine information over time by author type, geography (United States, United Kingdom, and Canada), and vaccine developer.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We found that 1.8% (131/7306) of tweets were anti-vaccine, but 21% (1533/7306) contained negative vaccine information. The media and government were common sources of negative vaccine information but not anti-vaccine content. Twitter users from the United States generated the plurality of negative vaccine information; however, Twitter users in the United Kingdom were more likely to generate negative vaccine information. Negative vaccine information related to the Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccine was the most common, particularly in March and April 2021.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Overall, the volume of explicit anti-vaccine content on Twitter was small, but negative vaccine information was relatively common and authored by a breadth of Twitter users (including government, medical, and media sources). Negative vaccine information should be distinguished from anti-vaccine content, and its presence on social media could be promoted as evidence of an effective communication system that is honest about the potential negative effects of vaccines while promoting the overall health benefits. However, this content could still contribute to vaccine hesitancy if it is not properly contextualized.</p>","PeriodicalId":73554,"journal":{"name":"JMIR infodemiology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2022-08-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9632001/pdf/","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JMIR infodemiology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2196/38485","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/7/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

Background: Social media platforms, such as Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, and YouTube, have a role in spreading anti-vaccine opinion and misinformation. Vaccines have been an important component of managing the COVID-19 pandemic, so content that discourages vaccination is generally seen as a concern to public health. However, not all negative information about vaccines is explicitly anti-vaccine, and some of it may be an important part of open communication between public health experts and the community.

Objective: This research aimed to determine the frequency of negative COVID-19 vaccine information on Twitter in the first 4 months of 2021.

Methods: We manually coded 7306 tweets sampled from a large sampling frame of tweets related to COVID-19 and vaccination collected in early 2021. We also coded the geographic location and mentions of specific vaccine producers. We compared the prevalence of anti-vaccine and negative vaccine information over time by author type, geography (United States, United Kingdom, and Canada), and vaccine developer.

Results: We found that 1.8% (131/7306) of tweets were anti-vaccine, but 21% (1533/7306) contained negative vaccine information. The media and government were common sources of negative vaccine information but not anti-vaccine content. Twitter users from the United States generated the plurality of negative vaccine information; however, Twitter users in the United Kingdom were more likely to generate negative vaccine information. Negative vaccine information related to the Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccine was the most common, particularly in March and April 2021.

Conclusions: Overall, the volume of explicit anti-vaccine content on Twitter was small, but negative vaccine information was relatively common and authored by a breadth of Twitter users (including government, medical, and media sources). Negative vaccine information should be distinguished from anti-vaccine content, and its presence on social media could be promoted as evidence of an effective communication system that is honest about the potential negative effects of vaccines while promoting the overall health benefits. However, this content could still contribute to vaccine hesitancy if it is not properly contextualized.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
推特上关于COVID-19疫苗的负面信息:内容分析
背景:社交媒体平台,如Facebook、Instagram、Twitter和YouTube,在传播反疫苗观点和错误信息方面发挥了作用。疫苗一直是管理COVID-19大流行的重要组成部分,因此,阻碍疫苗接种的内容通常被视为对公共卫生的担忧。然而,并非所有关于疫苗的负面信息都是明确的反疫苗信息,其中一些信息可能是公共卫生专家与社区之间公开交流的重要组成部分。目的:本研究旨在确定2021年前4个月Twitter上COVID-19疫苗阴性信息的频率。方法:我们从2021年初收集的与COVID-19和疫苗接种相关的推文的大采样框架中抽样,对7306条推文进行人工编码。我们还对地理位置和提到的特定疫苗生产商进行了编码。我们按作者类型、地理位置(美国、英国和加拿大)和疫苗开发商比较了抗疫苗和阴性疫苗信息随时间的流行情况。结果:1.8%(131/7306)的推文为反疫苗信息,21%(1533/7306)的推文为疫苗负面信息。媒体和政府是负面疫苗信息的常见来源,而不是反疫苗内容的来源。来自美国的推特用户产生了多个负面疫苗信息;然而,英国的推特用户更有可能产生负面的疫苗信息。与牛津/阿斯利康疫苗相关的负面疫苗信息最为常见,特别是在2021年3月和4月。结论:总体而言,Twitter上明确的反疫苗内容数量较少,但负面疫苗信息相对普遍,并且由广泛的Twitter用户(包括政府、医疗和媒体来源)撰写。负面疫苗信息应与反疫苗内容区分开来,社交媒体上的负面信息可以作为有效沟通系统的证据加以推广,该系统在促进整体健康效益的同时,对疫苗的潜在负面影响保持诚实。然而,如果不适当地将其置于背景中,这一内容仍可能导致疫苗犹豫。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
The Use of Natural Language Processing Methods in Reddit to Investigate Opioid Use: Scoping Review. Effects of COVID-19 Illness and Vaccination Infodemic Through Mobile Health, Social Media, and Electronic Media on the Attitudes of Caregivers and Health Care Providers in Pakistan: Qualitative Exploratory Study. Descriptions of Scientific Evidence and Uncertainty of Unproven COVID-19 Therapies in US News: Content Analysis Study. Ethical Considerations in Infodemic Management: Systematic Scoping Review. Large Language Models Can Enable Inductive Thematic Analysis of a Social Media Corpus in a Single Prompt: Human Validation Study.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1