ArticleSocial science & medicine (1982)2024
Vaccine rhetoric on social media and COVID-19 vaccine uptake rates: A triangulation using self-reported vaccine acceptance.
Article in Social science & medicine (1982), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Digital Health Communication and Vaccine Confidence in Mexico Using Aggregated Randomized Brand Lift Studies: Secondary Analysis.JMIR formative research · 2026Article
- Sentiment analysis of internet posts on vaccination using ChatGPT and comparison with actual vaccination rates in South Korea.F1000Research · 2024Article
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
The primary goal of this study is to examine the association between vaccine rhetoric on Twitter and the public's uptake rates of COVID-19 vaccines in the United States, compared to the extent of an association between self-reported vaccine acceptance and the CDC's uptake rates. We downloaded vaccine-related posts on Twitter in real-time daily for 13 months, from October 2021 to September 2022, collecting over half a billion tweets. A previously validated deep-learning algorithm was then applied to (1) filter out irrelevant tweets and (2) group the remaining relevant tweets into pro-, anti-, and neutral vaccine sentiments. Our results indicate that the tweet counts (combining all three sentiments) were significantly correlated with the uptake rates of all stages of COVID-19 shots (p < 0.01). The self-reported level of vaccine acceptance was not correlated with any of the stages of COVID-19 shots (p > 0.05) but with the daily new infection counts. These results suggest that although social media posts on vaccines may not represent the public's opinions, they are aligned with the public's behaviors of accepting vaccines, which is an essential step for developing interventions to increase the uptake rates. In contrast, self-reported vaccine acceptance represents the public's opinions, but these were not correlated with the behaviors of accepting vaccines. These outcomes provide empirical support for the validity of social media analytics for gauging the public's vaccination behaviors and understanding a nuanced perspective of the public's vaccine sentiment for health emergencies.
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.