ArticlePreventive medicine reports2017
A readability comparison of anti- versus pro-influenza vaccination online messages in Japan.
Article in Preventive medicine reports, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Psychological mechanisms and interventions directed at vaccination attitudes.Frontiers in sociology · 2023Review
- Impact of COVID-19 Vaccine Misinformation on Social Media Virality: Content Analysis of Message Themes and Writing Strategies.Journal of medical Internet research · 2022Article
- Urgent need for writing education in schools of medicine and public health to address vaccine hesitancy.International journal of medical education · 2021Article
- Readability Assessment of HPV Vaccination and Cervical Cancer Information: A Systematic Scoping Review.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- A comprehensive analysis of Italian web pages mentioning squalene-based influenza vaccine adjuvants reveals a high prevalence of misinformation.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2018Article
- A qualitative analysis of the beliefs of Japanese anti-influenza vaccination website authors.Heliyon · 2018Article
- Influence of high versus low readability level of written health information on self-efficacy: A randomized controlled study of the processing fluency effect.Health psychology openArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Historically, anti-vaccination sentiment has existed in many populations. Mass media plays a large role in disseminating and sensationalizing vaccine objections, especially via the medium of the Internet. Based on studies of processing fluency, we assumed that anti-influenza vaccination online messages to be more readable and more fluently processed than pro-influenza vaccination online messages, which may consequently sway the opinions of some audiences. The aim of this study was to compare readability of anti- and pro-influenza vaccination online messages in Japan using a measure of readability. Web searches were conducted at the end of August 2016 using two major Japanese search engines (Google.jp and Yahoo!.jp). The included websites were classified as "anti", "pro", or "both" depending on the claims, and "health professional" or "non-health professional" depending on the writers' expertise. Readability was determined using a validated measure of Japanese readability (the Japanese sentence difficulty discrimination system). Readability of "health professional" websites was compared with that of "non-health professional" websites, and readability of "anti" websites was compared with that of "pro" websites, using the
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.