ABSTRACT
Social media content creators or "influencers" are an increasingly influential voice in the public discourse generally, including global perceptions and practices related to health. In response, public health entities are increasingly embracing social media influencers (SMIs) as potential health promotion collaborators. Despite burgeoning interest in the potential of these partnerships, research evaluating this strategy remains limited. To address this gap, we conducted a scoping review to characterize and describe the current landscape of health promotion collaborations with SMIs with a focus on current practices. A search of six electronic databases (PubMed, SCOPUS, Communication & Mass Media Complete, CINAHL Plus, Web of Science, and APA PsycINFO) revealed wide-ranging and inconsistent approaches to these partnerships, including their optimal practices, data reported, and their evaluation criteria. Among the 658 articles initially identified, 15 publications met our inclusion criteria, spanning 7 countries, 8 social media platforms, 11 distinct health topics, and 21 different outcome measures. Basic information necessary for comparing across interventions was often lacking. We noted a lack of consensus on what constitutes an SMI with 53% of included studies lacking any definition or criteria. Although SMIs offer substantial promise as an emerging opportunity for health promotion, particularly for populations that may be otherwise difficult to identify or reach, this review highlights how the current lack of standardized methodologies and metrics prevents meaningful comparisons between collaborations and evaluations of their effectiveness. Based on these findings, we propose four key criteria to aid practitioners in the implementation and evaluation of SMI collaborations.
ABSTRACT
The COVID-19 pandemic has not only led to massive global mortality and morbidity, but it has also fueled an infodemic of false and misleading information about COVID-19 and vaccines. The spread of misinformation and disinformation on vaccine safety and efficacy has contributed to vaccine hesitancy and distrust of public health institutions and has undermined the public health response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Because communication plays a monumental role in pandemic preparedness, a promising approach to countering the COVID-19 infodemic is empowering peers to serve as trusted messengers to provide accurate information using evidence-based communication approaches. With this in mind, we developed a massive open online course (MOOC) to provide the general public with the knowledge, skills, and resources to effectively navigate potentially contentious vaccine conversations with their peers, with a specific focus on parents. Within the first year of the course launch, 29,000 people had enrolled. Learners appreciated the information related to vaccine development, communication tips and techniques, and identifying and responding to vaccine misinformation. Over 1,000 learners who completed the course participated in an online evaluation survey. To address public distrust in healthcare providers, government, and science, our survey results indicate that peer-to-peer approaches to addressing vaccine hesitancy can empower community members to educate others and promote vaccine acceptance at scale.
