ArticleHuman vaccines & immunotherapeutics2026
How the unvaccinated have been portrayed in the urban English-language Canadian popular press since the declared end of the COVID-19 pandemic emergency.
Article in Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Since the WHO declared the end of the COVID-19 emergency in May 2023, public vaccination remains a complex issue intertwined with politicization and misinformation. This research article examined how the "unvaccinated" have been portrayed in the urban English-language Canadian popular press between May 2023 and May 2025, specifically comparing coverage of COVID-19 with the emerging 2024-2025 measles outbreaks. Through a content analysis of 308 articles from major national and urban news sources, the study reveals a dichotomy in journalistic framing. Findings indicate that COVID-19 reporting remained heavily politicized and rooted in ideological debates. These articles focused primarily on politics, mandate arguments, government critiques, and claims of discrimination against the unvaccinated, with only 40% mentioning unvaccinated health risks to oneself or others. In contrast, measles coverage adopted a more traditional public health lens; 96% of these articles characterized being unvaccinated as a health risk to oneself or others, frequently emphasizing vaccine importance and uptake strategies while largely avoiding broader socio-political issues. The study suggests that while the Canadian popular press successfully conveys scientific urgency in novel or acute health threats like measles, its continued focus on socio-political conflict regarding COVID-19 represents problematic science communication. Covering "agenda-setting" political narratives is an important aspect of the COVID-19 pandemic but should not dominate or stand in place of evolving clinical evidence on reinfection and vaccine efficacy. Depoliticizing scientific realities and reintegrating established health-risk data into all vaccine-related reporting is necessary for supporting public health in any infectious disease contexts.
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.