Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 5 de 5
Filter
1.
Vaccine X ; 12: 100231, 2022 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2251589

ABSTRACT

Introduction: The human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine is highly effective at preventing HPV-associated cancers in both males and females, yet vaccination rates remain sub-optimal in part due to vaccine hesitancy. This study sought to assess which strategies vaccine-hesitant parents perceive as most likely to motivate them to vaccinate their children against HPV. Methods: In 2021, we recruited parents with children ages 10-17 years old who were not vaccinated against HPV and who felt unsure or hesitant about their decision to vaccinate their child. Participants were recruited through an online patient portal within a single institution. A screening survey assessed for vaccine hesitancy. Semi-structured interviews focused on HPV vaccine decision-making, motivators, and potential strategies to improve vaccination rates in hesitant parents. Audio recordings were transcribed and analyzed via a combination of deductive and inductive codes. Results and Discussion: A total of twenty-two vaccine-hesitant parents were interviewed. The major themes identified were a lack of confidence in vaccine decision-making, a desire for more information, and dissatisfaction with provider encounters. Parents reported that their hesitancy was driven by concerns about safety and necessity, often based on negative anecdotal reports. Although pediatricians were the most often cited source of vaccine information, many parents were dissatisfied with the encounters they had regarding the vaccine. Parents expressed a desire for detailed information on both the benefits and risks of the vaccine, and resources that allowed them to actively participate in vaccine discussions with providers. Suggested modes of delivery for this information included in-depth pediatrician discussions, written materials provided by pediatricians, and facilitation tools, such as a list of questions to help parents prepare for pediatrician visits. Thus, strategies that empower parents to feel informed and confident in their decision to vaccinate their children could be useful in motivating vaccine-hesitant parents to vaccinate their children against HPV.

2.
Curr Psychol ; 41(11): 7918-7926, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2075647

ABSTRACT

COVID-19 skepticism can be conceptualized as the denial of the seriousness of the illness and the perception that the pandemic is overblown or a hoax. In the current study, we examined the association between COVID-19 skepticism and frequency of engaging in COVID-19 prevention behaviors, political ideology, social norms about distancing, COVID-19 information-seeking behaviors, and COVID-19 conspiracy theories. A survey was administered from May 5th-14th. At that time, there were over 1 million COVID-19 cases in the US. Participants were recruited online through MTurk. The three outcome variables were handwashing, mask wearing, and social distancing. Injunctive and descriptive norms were assessed as well as measures of perceived risk to self and others. There were 683 participants in the analyses. In the multiple logistic regression model, those who were of younger age (aOR = 0.97, p < 0.05), better health (aOR = 0.56, p < 0.01), and more politically conservative (aOR = 1.32, p < 0.01) were more likely to endorse COVID-19 skepticism statements. People who reported higher Skepticism were also less likely to that believe people close to them would die from COVID-19 (aOR = 4.2, p < 0.01), engage in COVID-19 prevention behaviors, including spending time inside to prevent coronavirus (aOR = 0.33, p < 0.01) and frequently wear a mask outside (aOR = 0.44, p < 0.01). Those who were more skeptical about COVID-19 were also more likely to believe the conspiracy theory that China purposefully spread the virus (aOR = 6.38 p < 0.01). COVID-19 Skepticism was strongly associated with reduced engagement in COVID-19 prevention behaviors. These findings bolster the arguments for making these public health recommendations mandatory.

3.
J Med Internet Res ; 24(3): e25243, 2022 03 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1770879

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Most of what is known regarding health information engagement on social media stems from quantitative methodologies. Public health literature often quantifies engagement by measuring likes, comments, and/or shares of posts within health organizations' Facebook pages. However, this content may not represent the health information (and misinformation) generally available to and consumed by platform users. Furthermore, some individuals may prefer to engage with information without leaving quantifiable digital traces. Mixed methods approaches may provide a way of surpassing the constraints of assessing engagement with health information by using only currently available social media metrics. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to discuss the limitations of current approaches in assessing health information engagement on Facebook and presents the social media content and context elicitation method, a qualitatively driven, mixed methods approach to understanding engagement with health information and how engagement may lead to subsequent actions. METHODS: Data collection, management, and analysis using the social media content and context elicitation method are presented. This method was developed for a broader study exploring how and why US Latinos and Latinas engage with cancer prevention and screening information on Facebook. The study included 20 participants aged between 40 and 75 years without cancer who participated in semistructured, in-depth interviews to discuss their Facebook use and engagement with cancer information on the platform. Participants accessed their Facebook account alongside the researcher, typed cancer in the search bar, and discussed cancer-related posts they engaged with during the previous 12 months. Engagement was defined as liking, commenting, and/or sharing a post; clicking on a post link; reading an article in a post; and/or watching a video within a post. Content engagement prompted questions regarding the reasons for engagement and whether engagement triggered further action. Data were managed using MAXQDA (VERBI GmbH) and analyzed using thematic and content analyses. RESULTS: Data emerging from the social media content and context elicitation method demonstrated that participants mainly engaged with cancer prevention and screening information by viewing and/or reading content (48/66, 73%) without liking, commenting, or sharing it. This method provided rich content regarding how US Latinos and Latinas engage with and act upon cancer prevention and screening information on Facebook. We present 2 emblematic cases from the main study to exemplify the additional information and context elicited from this methodology, which is currently lacking from quantitative approaches. CONCLUSIONS: The social media content and context elicitation method allows a better representation and deeper contextualization of how people engage with and act upon health information and misinformation encountered on social media. This method may be applied to future studies regarding how to best communicate health information on social media, including how these affect assessments of message credibility and accuracy, which can influence health outcomes.


Subject(s)
Social Media , Adult , Aged , Communication , Emotions , Humans , Middle Aged , Public Health , Research Design
4.
JMIR Public Health Surveill ; 7(2): e24429, 2021 02 19.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1172957

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Public health organizations have begun to use social media to increase awareness of health harm and positively improve health behavior. Little is known about effective strategies to disseminate health education messages digitally and ultimately achieve optimal audience engagement. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to assess the difference in audience engagement with identical antismoking health messages on three social media sites (Twitter, Facebook, and Instagram) and with a referring link to a tobacco prevention website cited in these messages. We hypothesized that health messages might not receive the same user engagement on these media, although these messages were identical and distributed at the same time. METHODS: We measured the effect of health promotion messages on the risk of smoking among users of three social media sites (Twitter, Facebook, and Instagram) and disseminated 1275 health messages between April 19 and July 12, 2017 (85 days). The identical messages were distributed at the same time and as organic (unpaid) and advertised (paid) messages, each including a link to an educational website with more information about the topic. Outcome measures included message engagement (ie, the click-through rate [CTR] of the social media messages) and educational website engagement (ie, the CTR on the educational website [wCTR]). To analyze the data and model relationships, we used mixed effects negative binomial regression, z-statistic, and the Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness-of-fit test. RESULTS: Comparisons between social media sites showed that CTRs for identical antitobacco health messages differed significantly across social media (P<.001 for all). Instagram showed the statistically significant highest overall mean message engagement (CTR=0.0037; 95% CI 0.0032-0.0042), followed by Facebook (CTR=0.0026; 95% CI 0.0022-0.0030) and Twitter (CTR=0.0015; 95% CI 0.0013-0.0017). Facebook showed the highest as well as the lowest CTR for any individual message. However, the message CTR is not indicative of user engagement with the educational website content. Pairwise comparisons of the social media sites differed with respect to the wCTR (P<.001 for all). Messages on Twitter showed the lowest CTR, but they resulted in the highest level of website engagement (wCTR=0.6308; 95% CI 0.5640-0.6975), followed by Facebook (wCTR=0.2213; 95% CI 0.1932-0.2495) and Instagram (wCTR=0.0334; 95% CI 0.0230-0.0438). We found a statistically significant higher CTR for organic (unpaid) messages (CTR=0.0074; 95% CI 0.0047-0.0100) compared with paid advertisements (CTR=0.0022; 95% CI 0.0017-0.0027; P<.001 and P<.001, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Our study provides evidence-based insights to guide the design of health promotion efforts on social media. Future studies should examine the platform-specific impact of psycholinguistic message variations on user engagement, include newer sites such as Snapchat and TikTok, and study the correlation between web-based behavior and real-world health behavior change. The need is urgent in light of increased health-related marketing and misinformation on social media.


Subject(s)
Health Communication , Health Promotion/methods , Public Health , Smoking Prevention , Social Media/statistics & numerical data , Humans
5.
Health Secur ; 19(4): 370-378, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-990529

ABSTRACT

In this paper, we present a research agenda for longitudinal risk communication during a global pandemic. Starting from an understanding that traditional approaches to risk communication for epidemics, crises, and disasters have focused on short-duration events, we acknowledge the limitations of existing theories, frameworks, and models for both research and practice in a rapidly changing communication environment. We draw from scholarship in communication, sociology, anthropology, public health, emergency management, law, and technology to identify research questions that are fundamental to the communication challenges that have emerged under the threat of COVID-19. We pose a series of questions focused around 5 topics, then offer a catalog of prior research to serve as points of departure for future research efforts. This compiled agenda offers guidance to scholars engaging in practitioner-informed research and provides risk communicators with a set of substantial research questions to guide future knowledge needs.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Communicable Disease Control , Communication , Public Health , Risk Assessment , Attention , Humans , Motivation , Time Factors , Trust
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL