Tustin Jordan Lee, Crowcroft Natasha Sarah, Gesink Dionne, Johnson Ian, Keelan Jennifer, Lachapelle Barbara
School of Occupational and Public Health, Ryerson University, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
JMIR Public Health Surveill. 2018 Sep 20;4(3):e10090. doi: 10.2196/10090.
More people are searching for immunization information online and potentially being exposed to misinformation and antivaccination sentiment in content and discussions on social media platforms. As vaccination coverage rates remain suboptimal in several developed countries, and outbreaks of vaccine-preventable diseases become more prevalent, it is important that we build on previous research by analyzing themes in online vaccination discussions, including those that individuals may see without actively searching for information on immunization.
The study aimed to explore the sentiments and themes behind an unsolicited debate on immunization in order to better inform public health interventions countering antivaccination sentiment.
We analyzed and quantified 117 user-driven open-ended comments on immunization posted in the Comments section of a Facebook advertisement that targeted Canadian parents for recruitment into a larger study on immunization. Then, 2 raters coded all comments using content analysis.
Of 117 comments, 85 were posted by unique commentators, with most being female (65/85, 77%). The largest proportion of the immunization comments were positive (51/117, 43.6%), followed by negative (41/117, 35.0%), ambiguous (20/117, 17.1%), and hesitant (5/117, 4.3%). Inaccurate knowledge (27/130, 20.8%) and misperceptions of risk (23/130, 17.7%) were most prevalent in the 130 nonpositive comments. Other claims included distrust of pharmaceutical companies or government agencies (18/130, 13.8%), distrust of the health care system or providers (15/130, 11.5%), past negative experiences with vaccination or beliefs (10/130, 7.7%), and attitudes about health and prevention (10/130, 7.7%). Almost 40% (29/74, 39%) of the positive comments communicated the risks of not vaccinating, followed by judgments on the knowledge level of nonvaccinators (13/74, 18%). A total of 10 positive comments (10/74, 14%) specifically refuted the link between autism and vaccination.
The presence of more than 100 unsolicited user-driven comments on a platform not intended for discussion, nor providing any information on immunization, illustrates the strong sentiments associated with immunization and the arbitrariness of the online platforms used for immunization debates. Health authorities should be more proactive in finding mechanisms to refute misinformation and misperceptions that are propagating uncontested online. Online debates and communications on immunization need to be identified by continuous monitoring in order for health authorities to understand the current themes and trends, and to engage in the discussion.
越来越多的人在网上搜索免疫接种信息,并且在社交媒体平台的内容和讨论中可能接触到错误信息和反疫苗情绪。由于在一些发达国家,疫苗接种覆盖率仍未达到最佳水平,且疫苗可预防疾病的爆发愈发普遍,因此,在以往研究的基础上,分析在线疫苗接种讨论中的主题,包括那些人们可能在未主动搜索免疫接种信息时看到的内容,显得尤为重要。
本研究旨在探究一场关于免疫接种的自发辩论背后的情绪和主题,以便为应对反疫苗情绪的公共卫生干预措施提供更充分的信息。
我们分析并量化了在脸书一则广告评论区发布的117条用户自发的关于免疫接种的开放式评论,该广告针对加拿大父母,旨在招募他们参与一项关于免疫接种的更大规模研究。然后,两名评分者使用内容分析法对所有评论进行编码。
在117条评论中,85条由不同评论者发布,其中大多数为女性(65/85,77%)。免疫接种评论中占比最大的是积极评论(51/117,43.6%),其次是消极评论(41/117,35.0%)、模糊评论(20/117,17.1%)和犹豫评论(5/117,4.3%)。在130条非积极评论中,不准确的知识(27/130,20.8%)和对风险的误解(23/130,17.7%)最为普遍。其他观点包括对制药公司或政府机构的不信任(18/130,13.8%)、对医疗保健系统或提供者的不信任(15/130,11.5%)、过去接种疫苗的负面经历或信念(10/130,7.7%)以及对健康和预防的态度(10/130,7.7%)。近40%(29/74,39%)的积极评论提到了不接种疫苗的风险,其次是对未接种者知识水平的评判(13/74,18%)。共有10条积极评论(10/74,14%)特别驳斥了自闭症与疫苗接种之间的联系。
在一个并非用于讨论、也未提供任何免疫接种信息的平台上,出现了100多条用户自发的评论,这表明与免疫接种相关的情绪强烈,以及用于免疫接种辩论的在线平台具有随意性。卫生当局应更积极主动地寻找机制,反驳在网上肆意传播的错误信息和误解。需要通过持续监测来识别关于免疫接种的在线辩论和交流,以便卫生当局了解当前的主题和趋势,并参与讨论。