Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36447994›Full record

ArticlePublic health in practice (Oxford, England)2022

Addressing COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy: A content analysis of government social media platforms in England and Italy during 2020-2021.

Giulia Sesa, Katarzyna Czabanowska, Antonio Giangreco, John Middleton

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Public health in practice (Oxford, England), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

4 authors.

Giulia SesaDepartment of International Health, CAPHRI, FHML, Maastricht University, Maastricht, the Netherlands.
Katarzyna CzabanowskaDepartment of International Health, CAPHRI, FHML, Maastricht University, Maastricht, the Netherlands.
Antonio GiangrecoIESEG School of Management Univ. Lille, CNRS, UMR, 9221, LEM - Lille Economie Management, Lille, France.
John MiddletonAssociation of the Schools of Public Health in the European Region (ASPHER), Brussels, Belgium.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objectives: This study investigates how England's and Italy's Public Health Governmental Departments addressed COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy (VH) on social media platforms. Study design: A conventional content analysis of the social media accounts of Public Health England (PHE), currently the UK Health Security Agency, and the Italian Ministry of Health (IMH) were performed during December 1st, 2020-April 30th, 2021. Methods: A total of 531 and 110 posts were extracted from the accounts of PHE and the IMH respectively. Results: Similar themes were identified in the government social media posts from both countries, however, significant differences in theme distribution were noted. In England, the most common theme around COVID-19 vaccinations was the vaccine rollout (51%), while themes aimed at addressing VH specifically (44.8%) were debunking vaccine myths (10.5%), reaching/addressing minorities (8.5%), institutional encouragement (13.4%), and benefits of vaccines (12.4%). In contrast, Italian government posts majorly discussed COVID-19 vaccine news and updates (27.3%). Posts addressing VH (62.7%) focused on encouraging vaccination (37.3%), describing the benefits of vaccines (17.3%), debunking myths (4.5%), and communication campaigns (3.6%). Conclusions: Approximately half of British and Italian government social media posts on COVID-19 were related to addressing vaccine hesitancy. Although similar themes were evident, there were also themes unique to each country.

Indexed as

COVID-19EnglandItalySocial mediaVaccine hesitancy

Identifiers

PMID36447994
PMCPMC9683849

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.