Dataset Information

"Do not inject our babies": a social listening analysis of public opinion about authorizing pediatric COVID-19 vaccines.

ABSTRACT: Designing effective childhood vaccination counseling guidelines, public health campaigns, and school-entry mandates requires a nuanced understanding of the information ecology in which parents make vaccination decisions. However, evidence is lacking on how best to "catch the signal" about the public's attitudes, beliefs, and misperceptions. In this study, we characterize public sentiment and discourse about vaccinating children against SARS-CoV-2 with mRNA vaccines to identify prevalent concerns about the vaccine and to understand anti-vaccine rhetorical strategies. We applied computational topic modeling to 149 897 comments submitted to regulations.gov in October 2021 and February 2022 regarding the Food and Drug Administration's Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee's emergency use authorization of the COVID-19 vaccines for children. We used a latent Dirichlet allocation topic modeling algorithm to generate topics and then used iterative thematic and discursive analysis to identify relevant domains, themes, and rhetorical strategies. Three domains emerged: (1) specific concerns about the COVID-19 vaccines; (2) foundational beliefs shaping vaccine attitudes; and (3) rhetorical strategies deployed in anti-vaccine arguments. Computational social listening approaches can contribute to misinformation surveillance and evidence-based guidelines for vaccine counseling and public health promotion campaigns.

SUBMITTER: Golos AM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC11229700 | biostudies-literature | 2024 Jul

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

"Do not inject our babies": a social listening analysis of public opinion about authorizing pediatric COVID-19 vaccines.

Golos Aleksandra M AM Guntuku Sharath-Chandra SC Buttenheim Alison M AM

Health affairs scholar 20240708 7

Designing effective childhood vaccination counseling guidelines, public health campaigns, and school-entry mandates requires a nuanced understanding of the information ecology in which parents make vaccination decisions. However, evidence is lacking on how best to "catch the signal" about the public's attitudes, beliefs, and misperceptions. In this study, we characterize public sentiment and discourse about vaccinating children against SARS-CoV-2 with mRNA vaccines to identify prevalent concerns ...[more]

PMID: 38979103

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundMonitoring public confidence and hesitancy is crucial for the COVID-19 vaccine rollout. Social media listening (infoveillance) can not only monitor public attitudes on COVID-19 vaccines but also assess the dissemination of and public engagement with these opinions.ObjectiveThis study aims to assess global hesitancy, confidence, and public engagement toward COVID-19 vaccination.MethodsWe collected posts mentioning the COVID-19 vaccine between June and July 2020 on Twitter from New York (United States), London (United Kingdom), Mumbai (India), and Sao Paulo (Brazil), and Sina Weibo posts from Beijing (China). In total, we manually coded 12,886 posts from the five global metropolises with high COVID-19 burdens, and after assessment, 7032 posts were included in the analysis. We manually double-coded these posts using a coding framework developed according to the World Health Organization's Confidence, Complacency, and Convenience model of vaccine hesitancy, and conducted engagement analysis to investigate public communication about COVID-19 vaccines on social media.ResultsAmong social media users, 36.4% (571/1568) in New York, 51.3% (738/1440) in London, 67.3% (144/214) in Sao Paulo, 69.8% (726/1040) in Mumbai, and 76.8% (2128/2770) in Beijing indicated that they intended to accept a COVID-19 vaccination. With a high perceived risk of getting COVID-19, more tweeters in New York and London expressed a lack of confidence in vaccine safety, distrust in governments and experts, and widespread misinformation or rumors. Tweeters from Mumbai, Sao Paulo, and Beijing worried more about vaccine production and supply, whereas tweeters from New York and London had more concerns about vaccine distribution and inequity. Negative tweets expressing lack of vaccine confidence and misinformation or rumors had more followers and attracted more public engagement online.ConclusionsCOVID-19 vaccine hesitancy is prevalent worldwide, and negative tweets attract higher engagement on social media. It is urgent to develop an effective vaccine campaign that boosts public confidence and addresses hesitancy for COVID-19 vaccine rollouts.

Project description:Despite ongoing calls for a more even global distribution of COVID-19 vaccines, there remains a great disparity between high- and low-income countries. We conducted representative surveys among the adult populations in the United States (N = 1,000) and Germany (N = 1,003) in June 2021 to assess public opinion in these countries on the distributive justice of COVID-19 vaccines. We conducted two instances of analytic hierarchy processes (AHP) to elicit how the public weighs different principles and criteria for vaccine allocation. In further discrete choice experiments, respondents were asked to split a limited supply of vaccine doses between a hypothetical high-income and a hypothetical low-income country. AHP weights in the United States and Germany were 37.4% (37.2-37.5) and 49.4% (49.2-49.5) for "medical urgency", 32.7% (32.6-32.8) and 25.4% (25.2-25.5) for "equal access for all", 13.7% (13.6-13.8) and 13.3% (13.2-13.4) for "production contribution", and 16.3% (16.2-16.4) and 12.0% (11.9-12.1) for "free market rules", respectively, with 95% CI shown in parentheses. In the discrete choice experiment, respondents in the United States and Germany split available vaccine doses such that the low-income country, which was three times more populous than the high-income country, on average received 53.9% (95% CI: 52.6-55.1) and 57.5% (95% CI: 56.3-58.7) of available doses, respectively. When faced with a dilemma where a vulnerable family member was waiting for a vaccine, 20.7% (95% CI: 18.2-23.3) of respondents in the United States and 18.2% (95% CI: 15.8-20.6) in Germany reduced the amount they allocated to the low-income country sufficiently to secure a vaccine for their family member. Our results indicate that the public in the United States and Germany favours utilitarian and egalitarian distribution principles of vaccines for COVID-19 over libertarian or meritocratic principles. This implies that political decisions favouring higher levels of redistribution would be supported by public opinion in these two countries.

Dataset Information

"Do not inject our babies": a social listening analysis of public opinion about authorizing pediatric COVID-19 vaccines.

Publications

"Do not inject our babies": a social listening analysis of public opinion about authorizing pediatric COVID-19 vaccines.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets