ArticleBMC public health2019
How organisations promoting vaccination respond to misinformation on social media: a qualitative investigation.
Article in BMC public health, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 63 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
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
63 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Social Media Use for Health Purposes: Systematic Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2021Pooled it
- Analysis of the Anti-Vaccine Movement in Social Networks: A Systematic Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2020Pooled it
- A Health Belief Model Approach to Determining Psychological Predictors of Behavioral Intention to Seek Health Information on Social Media: Quantitative Descriptive Study.Online journal of public health informatics · 2026Article
- Digital Strategies To Counter Health Misinformation and Strengthen Vaccine Acceptance: a Scoping Review.Journal of community health · 2026Review
- Article
- What can chatbot conversations reveal about vaccine concerns? An observational topic modelling study for public health infoveillance.BMJ digital health & AI · 2026Article
- Barriers and Predictors of HPV Vaccine Uptake Among Female Medical Students in Saudi Arabia: A Multi-Center Cross-Sectional Study.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- How the General Public Navigates Health Misinformation on Social Media: Qualitative Study of Identification and Response Approaches.JMIR infodemiology · 2025Article
- Article
- Co-Designing a Framework for Social Media Health Communication to Young People: A Participatory Research Study.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2025Article
- Vaccine Hesitancy and Immunization Patterns in Central and Eastern Europe: Sociocultural, Economic, Political, and Digital Influences Across Seven Countries.Risk management and healthcare policy · 2025Article
- Amplifying youth voices: young people's recommendations for policy and practice to enhance vaccine acceptability.BMC health services research · 2024Article
- Naive skepticism scale: development and validation tests applied to the chilean population.Psicologia, reflexao e critica : revista semestral do Departamento de Psicologia da UFRGS · 2024Article
- Enabling Semantic Topic Modeling on Twitter Using MetaMap.AMIA Joint Summits on Translational Science proceedings. AMIA Joint Summits on Translational Science · 2024Article
- Vaccine Refusal and Hesitancy among Iranians Participated in the National COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy Survey: A Qualitative Study.Medical journal of the Islamic Republic of Iran · 2024Article
- Strategies and bottlenecks to tackle infodemic in public health: a scoping review.Frontiers in public health · 2024Article
- Obstacles to routine immunization in Madagascar: Structural, relational and cultural constraints.Vaccine: X · 2023Review
- Perspectives and Experiences of Patients With Thyroid Cancer at a Global Level: Retrospective Descriptive Study of Twitter Data.JMIR cancer · 2023Article
- Spreading of misinformation on mass media and digital platforms regarding vaccines. A systematic scoping review on stakeholders, policymakers, and sentiments/behavior of Italian consumers.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2023Article
- Article
3 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundVaccination misinformation is associated with serious public health consequences, such as a decrease in vaccination rates and a risk of disease outbreaks. Although social media offers organisations promoting vaccination unparalleled opportunities to promote evidence and counterbalance misinformation, we know relatively little about their internal workings. The aim of this paper is to explore the strategies, perspectives and experiences of communicators working within such organisations as they promote vaccination and respond to misinformation on social media.
methodsUsing qualitative methods, we purposively sampled 21 participants responsible for routine social media activity and strategy from Australian organisations actively promoting vaccination on social media, including government health departments, local health services, advocacy groups, professional associations and technical/scientific organisations. We conducted semi-structured, in-depth interviews to explore their perspectives and practices. Applying Risk Communication principles as a lens, we used Framework Analysis to explore the data both inductively and deductively.
resultsOrganisations promoting vaccination face multiple challenges on social media, including misinformation, anti-science sentiment, a complex vaccination narrative and anti-vaccine activists. They developed a range of sophisticated strategies in response, including communicating with openness in an evidence-informed way; creating safe spaces to encourage audience dialogue; fostering community partnerships; and countering misinformation with care.
conclusionsWe recommend that communicators consider directly countering misinformation because of the potential influence on their silent audience, i.e. those observing but not openly commenting, liking or sharing posts. Refutations should be straightforward, succinct and avoid emphasizing misinformation. Communicators should consider pairing scientific evidence with stories that speak to audience beliefs and values. Finally, organisations could enhance vaccine promotion and their own credibility on social media by forming strong links with organisations sharing similar values and goals.
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.