ArticleVaccine2022
Negative sentiments toward novel coronavirus (COVID-19) vaccines.
Article in Vaccine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Changed Trends in Utilization and Substitution Pattern of Non-National Immunization Program Vaccines in Central China, 2011-2024.Vaccines · 2025Article
- Mapping the Mpox discourse: A network and sentiment analysis.Exploratory research in clinical and social pharmacy · 2024Article
- The assessment of Twitter discourse on the new COVID-19 variant, XBB.1.5, through social network analysis.Vaccine: X · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Addressing negative vaccine sentiments is paramount to COVID-19 prevention efforts. However, assessing population sentiments is challenging due to the desirability bias that can emerge when directly asking respondents for their opinions on vaccination. Social media data, containing people's unfiltered thoughts, have the potential to offer valuable insights that could guide vaccine promotion messaging. We extracted one week's (4/5-4/11, 2020) worth of COVID-19 vaccine posts on Twitter (tweets) from the U.S. (N = 208,973) and segmented tweets with negative sentiments toward COVID-19 vaccines (n = 14,794). We imputed location based on Twitter users' self-reported state of residence. We found that states in the South had significantly higher prevalence of negative tweets compared to states in other parts of the country, and higher-income states reported lower prevalence of negative tweets. Our findings suggest the existence of negative vaccine sentiments and geographic variability in these opinions, warranting tailored vaccine promotion efforts, particularly for the southern U.S.
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.