Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33555267›Full record

ArticleJMIR public health and surveillance2021

Methods for Social Media Monitoring Related to Vaccination: Systematic Scoping Review.

Emilie Karafillakis, Sam Martin, Clarissa Simas, Kate Olsson, Judit Takacs, Sara Dada, Heidi Jane Larson

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR public health and surveillance, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 40 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
40citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

40 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. The Battle for Beds before Health: Unpacking the Crisis of Healthcare in Ghana's Low-Income Communities.Journal of urban health : bulletin of the New York Academy of Medicine · 2026
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Mapping the Mpox discourse: A network and sentiment analysis.Exploratory research in clinical and social pharmacy · 2024
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Observational
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Emilie Karafillakis *London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, Vaccine Confidence Project, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0001-8648-906X
Sam Martin *London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, Vaccine Confidence Project, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-4466-8374
Clarissa SimasLondon School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, Vaccine Confidence Project, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-0035-8419
Kate OlssonEuropean Centre for Disease Prevention and Control, Stockhom, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0002-8398-2470
Judit TakacsEuropean Centre for Disease Prevention and Control, Stockhom, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0002-7509-0739
Sara DadaLondon School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, Vaccine Confidence Project, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-3910-1856
Heidi Jane LarsonLondon School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, Vaccine Confidence Project, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-8477-7583

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSocial media has changed the communication landscape, exposing individuals to an ever-growing amount of information while also allowing them to create and share content. Although vaccine skepticism is not new, social media has amplified public concerns and facilitated their spread globally. Multiple studies have been conducted to monitor vaccination discussions on social media. However, there is currently insufficient evidence on the best methods to perform social media monitoring.

objectiveThe aim of this study was to identify the methods most commonly used for monitoring vaccination-related topics on different social media platforms, along with their effectiveness and limitations.

methodsA systematic scoping review was conducted by applying a comprehensive search strategy to multiple databases in December 2018. The articles' titles, abstracts, and full texts were screened by two reviewers using inclusion and exclusion criteria. After data extraction, a descriptive analysis was performed to summarize the methods used to monitor and analyze social media, including data extraction tools; ethical considerations; search strategies; periods monitored; geolocalization of content; and sentiments, content, and reach analyses.

resultsThis review identified 86 articles on social media monitoring of vaccination, most of which were published after 2015. Although 35 out of the 86 studies used manual browser search tools to collect data from social media, this was time-consuming and only allowed for the analysis of small samples compared to social media application program interfaces or automated monitoring tools. Although simple search strategies were considered less precise, only 10 out of the 86 studies used comprehensive lists of keywords (eg, with hashtags or words related to specific events or concerns). Partly due to privacy settings, geolocalization of data was extremely difficult to obtain, limiting the possibility of performing country-specific analyses. Finally, 20 out of the 86 studies performed trend or content analyses, whereas most of the studies (70%, 60/86) analyzed sentiments toward vaccination. Automated sentiment analyses, performed using leverage, supervised machine learning, or automated software, were fast and provided strong and accurate results. Most studies focused on negative (n=33) and positive (n=31) sentiments toward vaccination, and may have failed to capture the nuances and complexity of emotions around vaccination. Finally, 49 out of the 86 studies determined the reach of social media posts by looking at numbers of followers and engagement (eg, retweets, shares, likes).

conclusionsSocial media monitoring still constitutes a new means to research and understand public sentiments around vaccination. A wide range of methods are currently used by researchers. Future research should focus on evaluating these methods to offer more evidence and support the development of social media monitoring as a valuable research design.

Indexed as

Social MediaVaccinationHumansantivaccination movementinfodemiologyinfoveillanceinternetmedia monitoringresearch designreviewsocial listeningsocial mediavaccinationvaccination refusal

Identifiers

PMID33555267
PMCPMC7899807

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.