Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35474313›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2022

Online misinformation is linked to early COVID-19 vaccination hesitancy and refusal.

Francesco Pierri, Brea L Perry, Matthew R DeVerna, Kai-Cheng Yang, Alessandro Flammini, Filippo Menczer, John Bryden

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 104 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
104citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
96.6field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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

104 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 253 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Observational
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Observational

44 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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 at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Francesco PierriDipartimento Di Elettronica, Informazione E Bioingegneria, Politecnico Di Milano, Milano, Italy. francesco.pierri@polimi.it.
Brea L PerryDepartment of Sociology, Indiana University, Bloomington, IN, USA.
Matthew R DeVernaObservatory On Social Media, Indiana University, Bloomington, IN, USA.
Kai-Cheng YangObservatory On Social Media, Indiana University, Bloomington, IN, USA.
Alessandro FlamminiObservatory On Social Media, Indiana University, Bloomington, IN, USA.
Filippo MenczerObservatory On Social Media, Indiana University, Bloomington, IN, USA.
John BrydenObservatory On Social Media, Indiana University, Bloomington, IN, USA.
Indiana University Bloomington · USPolitecnico di Milano · IT

Funding

European Research Council 101016233
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Widespread uptake of vaccines is necessary to achieve herd immunity. However, uptake rates have varied across U.S. states during the first six months of the COVID-19 vaccination program. Misbeliefs may play an important role in vaccine hesitancy, and there is a need to understand relationships between misinformation, beliefs, behaviors, and health outcomes. Here we investigate the extent to which COVID-19 vaccination rates and vaccine hesitancy are associated with levels of online misinformation about vaccines. We also look for evidence of directionality from online misinformation to vaccine hesitancy. We find a negative relationship between misinformation and vaccination uptake rates. Online misinformation is also correlated with vaccine hesitancy rates taken from survey data. Associations between vaccine outcomes and misinformation remain significant when accounting for political as well as demographic and socioeconomic factors. While vaccine hesitancy is strongly associated with Republican vote share, we observe that the effect of online misinformation on hesitancy is strongest across Democratic rather than Republican counties. Granger causality analysis shows evidence for a directional relationship from online misinformation to vaccine hesitancy. Our results support a need for interventions that address misbeliefs, allowing individuals to make better-informed health decisions.

Indexed as

COVID-19VaccinesCommunicationCOVID-19 VaccinesHumansPatient Acceptance of Health CareVaccinationVaccination HesitancyCOVID-19 VaccinesVaccines

Identifiers

PMID35474313
PMCPMC9043199
OpenAlexW4224979504

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.