Characterization of Vaccine Tweets During the Early Stage of the COVID-19 Outbreak in the United States: Topic Modeling Analysis

A Study of Discourse on COVID-19 Vaccines from Conspiracy Communities on Reddit Using Topic Modeling and Sentiment Analysis

Given the limited research on the content attributes of anti-vaccination discourse regarding COVID-19 vaccines, our study investigated how conspiracy communities on Reddit, which may serve as potential anti-vaccination groups, have framed their discussions about the vaccines. Using topic modeling, we identified six topics including conspiracy theories and vaccine hesitancy, scientific (mis)information, vaccine policies and politics, vaccine efficacy, impact on special groups, and adverse effects. Furthermore, drawing on social identity theory and the concept of echo chambers, we explored the online dynamics of these communities by examining how negative sentiments and user engagement varied across topics. Negative sentiments were strongest in discussions about vaccine efficacy and adverse effects, with vaccine efficacy generating the most fear and sadness, while adverse effects elicited the most anger and disgust. Engagement also varied across topics, with vaccine efficacy and conspiracy theories generating the highest number of comments, and vaccine efficacy receiving the most upvotes. Our study provides valuable insights into the discourse surrounding COVID-19 vaccines within conspiracy communities. The variations across topics offer a more nuanced understanding of this discourse and could inform developing tailored strategies to counter misinformation.

Conspiracy narratives and vaccine hesitancy: a scoping review of prevalence, impact, and interventions

Believing conspiracy narratives is frequently assumed to be a major cause of vaccine hesitancy, i.e., the tendency to forgo vaccination despite its availability. In this scoping review, we synthesise and critically evaluate studies that assess i) the occurrence of vaccine-related conspiracy narratives on the internet, ii) the prevalence of belief in vaccine-related conspiracy narratives, iii) the relationship between belief in conspiracy narratives and vaccination intention or vaccination uptake, and iv) interventions that reduce the impact of conspiracy narratives on vaccination intention.In July 2022, we conducted a literature search using three databases: PubMed, PsychInfo, and Web of Science. Following the PRISMA approach, of the 500 initially identified articles, 205 were eligible and analysed.The majority of identified studies were conducted in Europe and North America, were published in 2021 and 2022, and investigated conspiracy narratives around the COVID-19 vaccination. The prevalence of belief in various vaccine-related conspiracy narratives varied greatly across studies, from 2 to 77%. We identified seven experimental studies investigating the effect of exposure to conspiracy narratives on vaccination intentions, of which six indicated a small negative effect. These findings are complemented by the evidence from over 100 correlative studies showing a significant negative relationship between conspiracy beliefs and vaccination intention or uptake. Additionally, the review identified interventions (e.g., social norm feedback, fact-checking labels, or prebunking) that decreased beliefs in vaccine-related conspiracy narratives and, in some cases, also increased vaccination intentions. Yet, these interventions had only small effects.In summary, the review revealed that vaccine-related conspiracy narratives have spread to varying degrees and can influence vaccination decisions. Causal relationships between conspiracy beliefs and vaccination intentions remain underexplored. Further, the review identified a need for more research on interventions that can reduce the impact of conspiracy narratives.

A Comprehensive Analysis of COVID-19 Vaccine Discourse by Vaccine Brand on Twitter in Korea: Topic and Sentiment Analysis

BACKGROUND

The unprecedented speed of COVID-19 vaccine development and approval has raised public concern about its safety. However, studies on public discourses and opinions on social media focusing on adverse events (AEs) related to COVID-19 vaccine are rare.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to analyze Korean tweets about COVID-19 vaccines (Pfizer, Moderna, AstraZeneca, Janssen, and Novavax) after the vaccine rollout, explore the topics and sentiments of tweets regarding COVID-19 vaccines, and examine their changes over time. We also analyzed topics and sentiments focused on AEs related to vaccination using only tweets with terms about AEs.

METHODS

We devised a sophisticated methodology consisting of 5 steps: keyword search on Twitter, data collection, data preprocessing, data analysis, and result visualization. We used the Twitter Representational State Transfer application programming interface for data collection. A total of 1,659,158 tweets were collected from February 1, 2021, to March 31, 2022. Finally, 165,984 data points were analyzed after excluding retweets, news, official announcements, advertisements, duplicates, and tweets with <2 words. We applied a variety of preprocessing techniques that are suitable for the Korean language. We ran a suite of analyses using various Python packages, such as latent Dirichlet allocation, hierarchical latent Dirichlet allocation, and sentiment analysis.

RESULTS

The topics related to COVID-19 vaccines have a very large spectrum, including vaccine-related AEs, emotional reactions to vaccination, vaccine development and supply, and government vaccination policies. Among them, the top major topic was AEs related to COVID-19 vaccination. The AEs ranged from the adverse reactions listed in the safety profile (eg, myalgia, fever, fatigue, injection site pain, myocarditis or pericarditis, and thrombosis) to unlisted reactions (eg, irregular menstruation, changes in appetite and sleep, leukemia, and deaths). Our results showed a notable difference in the topics for each vaccine brand. The topics pertaining to the Pfizer vaccine mainly mentioned AEs. Negative public opinion has prevailed since the early stages of vaccination. In the sentiment analysis based on vaccine brand, the topics related to the Pfizer vaccine expressed the strongest negative sentiment.

CONCLUSIONS

Considering the discrepancy between academic evidence and public opinions related to COVID-19 vaccination, the government should provide accurate information and education. Furthermore, our study suggests the need for management to correct the misinformation related to vaccine-related AEs, especially those affecting negative sentiments. This study provides valuable insights into the public discourses and opinions regarding COVID-19 vaccination.

Using Social Media to Predict Food Deserts in the United States: Infodemiology Study of Tweets

BACKGROUND

The issue of food insecurity is becoming increasingly important to public health practitioners because of the adverse health outcomes and underlying racial disparities associated with insufficient access to healthy foods. Prior research has used data sources such as surveys, geographic information systems, and food store assessments to identify regions classified as food deserts but perhaps the individuals in these regions unknowingly provide their own accounts of food consumption and food insecurity through social media. Social media data have proved useful in answering questions related to public health; therefore, these data are a rich source for identifying food deserts in the United States.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to develop, from geotagged Twitter data, a predictive model for the identification of food deserts in the United States using the linguistic constructs found in food-related tweets.

METHODS

Twitter's streaming application programming interface was used to collect a random 1% sample of public geolocated tweets across 25 major cities from March 2020 to December 2020. A total of 60,174 geolocated food-related tweets were collected across the 25 cities. Each geolocated tweet was mapped to its respective census tract using point-to-polygon mapping, which allowed us to develop census tract-level features derived from the linguistic constructs found in food-related tweets, such as tweet sentiment and average nutritional value of foods mentioned in the tweets. These features were then used to examine the associations between food desert status and the food ingestion language and sentiment of tweets in a census tract and to determine whether food-related tweets can be used to infer census tract-level food desert status.

RESULTS

We found associations between a census tract being classified as a food desert and an increase in the number of tweets in a census tract that mentioned unhealthy foods (P=.03), including foods high in cholesterol (P=.02) or low in key nutrients such as potassium (P=.01). We also found an association between a census tract being classified as a food desert and an increase in the proportion of tweets that mentioned healthy foods (P=.03) and fast-food restaurants (P=.01) with positive sentiment. In addition, we found that including food ingestion language derived from tweets in classification models that predict food desert status improves model performance compared with baseline models that only include socioeconomic characteristics.

CONCLUSIONS

Social media data have been increasingly used to answer questions related to health and well-being. Using Twitter data, we found that food-related tweets can be used to develop models for predicting census tract food desert status with high accuracy and improve over baseline models. Food ingestion language found in tweets, such as census tract-level measures of food sentiment and healthiness, are associated with census tract-level food desert status.

Social media and attitudes towards a COVID-19 vaccination: A systematic review of the literature

Background

Vaccine hesitancy continues to limit global efforts in combatting the COVID-19 pandemic. Emerging research demonstrates the role of social media in disseminating information and potentially influencing people's attitudes towards public health campaigns. This systematic review sought to synthesize the current evidence regarding the potential role of social media in shaping COVID-19 vaccination attitudes, and to explore its potential for shaping public health interventions to address the issue of vaccine hesitancy.

Methods

We performed a systematic review of the studies published from inception to 13 of March2022 by searching PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, PsychNET, Scopus, CINAHL, and MEDLINE. Studies that reported outcomes related to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine (attitudes, opinion, etc.) gathered from the social media platforms, and those analyzing the relationship between social media use and COVID-19 hesitancy/acceptance were included. Studies that reported no outcome of interest or analyzed data from sources other than social media (websites, newspapers, etc.) will be excluded. The Newcastle Ottawa Scale (NOS) was used to assess the quality of all cross-sectional studies included in this review. This study is registered with PROSPERO (CRD42021283219).

Findings

Of the 2539 records identified, a total of 156 articles fully met the inclusion criteria. Overall, the quality of the cross-sectional studies was moderate - 2 studies received 10 stars, 5 studies received 9 stars, 9 studies were evaluated with 8, 12 studies with 7,16 studies with 6, 11 studies with 5, and 6 studies with 4 stars. The included studies were categorized into four categories. Cross-sectional studies reporting the association between reliance on social media and vaccine intentions mainly observed a negative relationship. Studies that performed thematic analyses of extracted social media data, mainly observed a domination of vaccine hesitant topics. Studies that explored the degree of polarization of specific social media contents related to COVID-19 vaccines observed a similar degree of content for both positive and negative tone posted on different social media platforms. Finally, studies that explored the fluctuations of vaccination attitudes/opinions gathered from social media identified specific events as significant cofactors that affect and shape vaccination intentions of individuals.

Interpretation

This thorough examination of the various roles social media can play in disseminating information to the public, as well as how individuals behave on social media in the context of public health events, articulates the potential of social media as a platform of public health intervention to address vaccine hesitancy.

Funding

None.

Spread of COVID-19 Vaccine Misinformation in the Ninth Inning: Retrospective Observational Infodemic Study

Background

Shortly after Pfizer and Moderna received emergency use authorizations from the Food and Drug Administration, there were increased reports of COVID-19 vaccine-related deaths in the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS). In January 2021, Major League Baseball legend and Hall of Famer, Hank Aaron, passed away at the age of 86 years from natural causes, just 2 weeks after he received the COVID-19 vaccine. Antivaccination groups attempted to link his death to the Moderna vaccine, similar to other attempts misrepresenting data from the VAERS to spread COVID-19 misinformation.

Objective

This study assessed the spread of misinformation linked to erroneous claims about Hank Aaron’s death on Twitter and then characterized different vaccine misinformation and hesitancy themes generated from users who interacted with this misinformation discourse.

Methods

An initial sample of tweets from January 31, 2021, to February 6, 2021, was queried from the Twitter Search Application Programming Interface using the keywords “Hank Aaron” and “vaccine.” The sample was manually annotated for misinformation, reporting or news media, and public reaction. Nonmedia user accounts were also classified if they were verified by Twitter. A second sample of tweets, representing direct comments or retweets to misinformation-labeled content, was also collected. User sentiment toward misinformation, positive (agree) or negative (disagree), was recorded. The Strategic Advisory Group of Experts Vaccine Hesitancy Matrix from the World Health Organization was used to code the second sample of tweets for factors influencing vaccine confidence.

Results

A total of 436 tweets were initially sampled from the Twitter Search Application Programming Interface. Misinformation was the most prominent content type (n=244, 56%) detected, followed by public reaction (n=122, 28%) and media reporting (n=69, 16%). No misinformation-related content reviewed was labeled as misleading by Twitter at the time of the study. An additional 1243 comments on misinformation-labeled tweets from 973 unique users were also collected, with 779 comments deemed relevant to study aims. Most of these comments expressed positive sentiment (n=612, 78.6%) to misinformation and did not refute it. Based on the World Health Organization Strategic Advisory Group of Experts framework, the most common vaccine hesitancy theme was individual or group influences (n=508, 65%), followed by vaccine or vaccination-specific influences (n=110, 14%) and contextual influences (n=93, 12%). Common misinformation themes observed included linking the death of Hank Aaron to “suspicious” elderly deaths following vaccination, claims about vaccines being used for depopulation, death panels, federal officials targeting Black Americans, and misinterpretation of VAERS reports. Four users engaging with or posting misinformation were verified on Twitter at the time of data collection.

Conclusions

Our study found that the death of a high-profile ethnic minority celebrity led to the spread of misinformation on Twitter. This misinformation directly challenged the safety and effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines at a time when ensuring vaccine coverage among minority populations was paramount. Misinformation targeted at minority groups and echoed by other verified Twitter users has the potential to generate unwarranted vaccine hesitancy at the expense of people such as Hank Aaron who sought to promote public health and community immunity.