Twitter Analysis of Health Care Workers' Sentiment and Discourse Regarding Post-COVID-19 Condition in Children and Young People: Mixed Methods Study.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has had a significant global impact, with millions of cases and deaths. Research highlights the persistence of symptoms over time (post-COVID-19 condition), a situation of particular concern in children and young people with symptoms. Social media such as Twitter (subsequently rebranded as X) could provide valuable information on the impact of the post-COVID-19 condition on this demographic. OBJECTIVE: With a social media analysis of the discourse surrounding the prevalence of post-COVID-19 condition in children and young people, we aimed to explore the perceptions of health care workers (HCWs) concerning post-COVID-19 condition in children and young people in the United Kingdom between January 2021 and January 2022. This will allow us to contribute to the emerging knowledge on post-COVID-19 condition and identify critical areas and future directions for researchers and policy makers. METHODS: From a pragmatic paradigm, we used a mixed methods approach. Through discourse, keyword, sentiment, and image analyses, using Pulsar and InfraNodus, we analyzed the discourse about the experience of post-COVID-19 condition in children and young people in the United Kingdom shared on Twitter between January 1, 2021, and January 31, 2022, from a sample of HCWs with Twitter accounts whose biography identifies them as HCWs. RESULTS: We obtained 300,000 tweets, out of which (after filtering for relevant tweets) we performed an in-depth qualitative sample analysis of 2588 tweets. The HCWs were responsive to announcements issued by the authorities regarding the management of the COVID-19 pandemic in the United Kingdom. The most frequent sentiment expressed was negative. The main themes were uncertainty about the future, policies and regulations, managing and addressing the COVID-19 pandemic and post-COVID-19 condition in children and young people, vaccination, using Twitter to share scientific literature and management strategies, and clinical and personal experiences. CONCLUSIONS: The perceptions described on Twitter by HCWs concerning the presence of the post-COVID-19 condition in children and young people appear to be a relevant and timely issue and responsive to the declarations and guidelines issued by health authorities over time. We recommend further support and training strategies for health workers and school staff regarding the manifestations and treatment of children and young people with post-COVID-19 condition.

Implementation of a day-stay joint replacement pathway in an Australian regional public hospital: A descriptive study.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the implementation, feasibility and safety of a day-stay joint replacement pathway in a regional public hospital in Australia. METHOD: Over a 12-month pilot period, a prospective descriptive analysis of consecutive patients undergoing total knee and hip arthroplasty was conducted. The number of eligible day-stay patients, proportion of successful same-day discharges and reasons for same-day failure to discharge were recorded. Outcome measures captured for all joint replacements across this period included length of stay (LoS), patient reported outcomes, complications and patient satisfaction. The implementation pathway as well as patient and staff identified success factors derived from interviews were outlined. RESULTS: Forty-one/246 (17%) patients booked for joint replacement surgery were eligible for day-stay and 21/41 (51%) achieved a successful same-day discharge. Unsuccessful same-day discharges were due to time of surgery too late in the day (7/20), no longer meeting same-day discharge criteria (11/20) and declined discharge same-day (2/20). Over the implementation period 65% (162/246) of all patients were discharged with a LoS of 2 days or less. Patient satisfaction for the day-stay pathway was high. Complication rates and patient-reported outcomes were equivalent across LoS groups. CONCLUSION: The day-stay joint replacement surgery pathway was feasible to implement, safe and acceptable to patients. Day-stay pathways have potential patient and system-level efficiency benefits.

Frontline Health Care Workers' Mental Health and Well-Being During the First Year of the COVID-19 Pandemic: Analysis of Interviews and Social Media Data.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has shed light on fractures in health care systems worldwide and continues to have a significant impact, particularly in relation to the health care workforce. Frontline staff have been exposed to unprecedented strain, and delivering care during the pandemic has affected their safety, mental health, and well-being. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to explore the experiences of health care workers (HCWs) delivering care in the United Kingdom during the COVID-19 pandemic to understand their well-being needs, experiences, and strategies used to maintain well-being (at individual and organizational levels). METHODS: We analyzed 94 telephone interviews with HCWs and 2000 tweets about HCWs' mental health during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic. RESULTS: The results were grouped under 6 themes: redeployment, clinical work, and sense of duty; well-being support and HCW's coping strategies; negative mental health effects; organizational support; social network and support; and public and government support. CONCLUSIONS: These findings demonstrate the need for open conversations, where staff's well-being needs and the strategies they adopted can be shared and encouraged, rather than implementing top-down psychological interventions alone. At the macro level, the findings also highlighted the impact on HCW's well-being of public and government support as well as the need to ensure protection through personal protective equipment, testing, and vaccines for frontline workers.

Missing the human connection: A rapid appraisal of healthcare workers' perceptions and experiences of providing palliative care during the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: During infectious epidemics, healthcare workers are required to deliver traditional care while facing new pressures. Time and resource restrictions, a focus on saving lives and new safety measures can lead to traditional aspects of care delivery being neglected. AIM: Identify barriers to delivering end-of-life care, describe attempts to deliver care during the COVID-19 pandemic, and understand the impact this had on staff. DESIGN: A rapid appraisal was conducted incorporating a rapid review of policies from the United Kingdom, semi-structured telephone interviews with healthcare workers, and a review of mass print media news stories and social media posts describing healthcare worker's experiences of delivering care during the pandemic. Data were coded and analysed using framework analysis. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: From a larger ongoing study, 22 interviews which mentioned death or caring for patients at end-of-life, eight government and National Health Service policies affecting end-of-life care delivery, eight international news media stories and 3440 publicly available social media posts were identified. The social media analysis centred around 274 original tweets with the highest reach, engagement and relevance. Incorporating multiple workstreams provided a broad perspective of end-of-life care during the COVID-19 pandemic in the United Kingdom. RESULTS: Three themes were developed: (1) restrictions to traditional care, (2) striving for new forms of care and (3) establishing identity and resilience. CONCLUSIONS: The COVID-19 pandemic prohibited the delivery of traditional care as practical barriers restricted human connections. Staff prioritised communication and comfort orientated tasks to re-establish compassion at end-of-life and displayed resilience by adjusting their goals.

Re-ordering connections: UK healthcare workers' experiences of emotion management during the COVID-19 pandemic.

This paper examines the impact of disruptions to the organisation and delivery of healthcare services and efforts to re-order care through emotion management during the COVID-19 pandemic in the UK. Framing care as an affective practice, studying healthcare workers' (HCWs) experiences enables better understanding of how interactions between staff, patients and families changed as a result of the pandemic. Using a rapid qualitative research methodology, we conducted interviews with frontline HCWs in two London hospitals during the peak of the first wave of the pandemic and sourced public accounts of HCWs' experiences of the pandemic from social media (YouTube and Twitter). We conducted framework analysis to identify key factors disrupting caring interactions. Fear of infection and the barriers of physical distancing acted to separate staff from patients and families, requiring new affective practices to repair connections. Witnessing suffering was distressing for staff, and providing a 'good death' for patients and communicating care to families was harder. In addition to caring for patients and families, HCWs cared for each other. Infection control measures were important for limiting the spread of COVID-19 but disrupted connections that were integral to care, generating new work to re-order interactions.

Public Sentiment and Discourse on Domestic Violence During the COVID-19 Pandemic in Australia: Analysis of Social Media Posts.

BACKGROUND: Measuring public response during COVID-19 is an important way of ensuring the suitability and effectiveness of epidemic response efforts. An analysis of social media provides an approximation of public sentiment during an emergency like the current pandemic. The measures introduced across the globe to help curtail the spread of the coronavirus have led to the development of a situation labeled as a "perfect storm," triggering a wave of domestic violence. As people use social media to communicate their experiences, analyzing public discourse and sentiment on social platforms offers a way to understand concerns and issues related to domestic violence during the COVID-19 pandemic. OBJECTIVE: This study was based on an analysis of public discourse and sentiment related to domestic violence during the stay-at-home periods of the COVID-19 pandemic in Australia in 2020. It aimed to understand the more personal self-reported experiences, emotions, and reactions toward domestic violence that were not always classified or collected by official public bodies during the pandemic. METHODS: We searched social media and news posts in Australia using key terms related to domestic violence and COVID-19 during 2020 via digital analytics tools to determine sentiments related to domestic violence during this period. RESULTS: The study showed that the use of sentiment and discourse analysis to assess social media data is useful in measuring the public expression of feelings and sharing of resources in relation to the otherwise personal experience of domestic violence. There were a total of 63,800 posts across social media and news media. Within these posts, our analysis found that domestic violence was mentioned an average of 179 times a day. There were 30,100 tweets, 31,700 news reports, 1500 blog posts, 548 forum posts, and 7 comments (posted on news and blog websites). Negative or neutral sentiment centered on the sharp rise in domestic violence during different lockdown periods of the 2020 pandemic, and neutral and positive sentiments centered on praise for efforts that raised awareness of domestic violence as well as the positive actions of domestic violence charities and support groups in their campaigns. There were calls for a positive and proactive handling (rather than a mishandling) of the pandemic, and results indicated a high level of public discontent related to the rising rates of domestic violence and the lack of services during the pandemic. CONCLUSIONS: This study provided a timely understanding of public sentiment related to domestic violence during the COVID-19 lockdown periods in Australia using social media analysis. Social media represents an important avenue for the dissemination of information; posts can be widely dispersed and easily accessed by a range of different communities who are often difficult to reach. An improved understanding of these issues is important for future policy direction. Heightened awareness of this could help agencies tailor and target messaging to maximize impact.

Cross-Country Comparison of Public Awareness, Rumors, and Behavioral Responses to the COVID-19 Epidemic: Infodemiology Study.

BACKGROUND: Understanding public behavioral responses to the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) epidemic and the accompanying infodemic is crucial to controlling the epidemic. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to assess real-time public awareness and behavioral responses to the COVID-19 epidemic across 12 selected countries. METHODS: Internet surveillance was used to collect real-time data from the general public to assess public awareness and rumors (China: Baidu; worldwide: Google Trends) and behavior responses (China: Ali Index; worldwide: Google Shopping). These indices measured the daily number of searches or purchases and were compared with the numbers of daily COVID-19 cases. The trend comparisons across selected countries were observed from December 1, 2019 (prepandemic baseline) to April 11, 2020 (at least one month after the governments of selected countries took actions for the pandemic). RESULTS: We identified missed windows of opportunity for early epidemic control in 12 countries, when public awareness was very low despite the emerging epidemic. China's epidemic and the declaration of a public health emergency of international concern did not prompt a worldwide public reaction to adopt health-protective measures; instead, most countries and regions only responded to the epidemic after their own case counts increased. Rumors and misinformation led to a surge of sales in herbal remedies in China and antimalarial drugs worldwide, and timely clarification of rumors mitigated the rush to purchase unproven remedies. CONCLUSIONS: Our comparative study highlights the urgent need for international coordination to promote mutual learning about epidemic characteristics and effective control measures as well as to trigger early and timely responses in individual countries. Early release of official guidelines and timely clarification of rumors led by governments are necessary to guide the public to take rational action.

Carrying Out Rapid Qualitative Research During a Pandemic: Emerging Lessons From COVID-19.

Social scientists have a robust history of contributing to better understandings of and responses to disease outbreaks. The implementation of qualitative research in the context of infectious epidemics, however, continues to lag behind in the delivery, credibility, and timeliness of findings when compared with other research designs. The purpose of this article is to reflect on our experience of carrying out three research studies (a rapid appraisal, a qualitative study based on interviews, and a mixed-methods survey) aimed at exploring health care delivery in the context of COVID-19. We highlight the importance of qualitative data to inform evidence-based public health responses and provide a way forward to global research teams who wish to implement similar rapid qualitative studies. We reflect on the challenges of setting up research teams, obtaining ethical approval, collecting and analyzing data in real-time and sharing actionable findings.

A Snapshot of COVID-19 Vaccine Discourse Related to Ethnic Minority Communities in the United Kingdom Between January and April 2022: Mixed Methods Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Existing literature highlights the role of social media as a key source of information for the public during the COVID-19 pandemic and its influence on vaccination attempts. Yet there is little research exploring its role in the public discourse specifically among ethnic minority communities, who have the highest rates of vaccine hesitancy (delay or refusal of vaccination despite availability of services). OBJECTIVE: This study aims to understand the discourse related to minority communities on social media platforms Twitter and YouTube. METHODS: Social media data from the United Kingdom was extracted from Twitter and YouTube using the software Netlytics and YouTube Data Tools to provide a "snapshot" of the discourse between January and April 2022. A mixed method approach was used where qualitative data were contextualized into codes. Network analysis was applied to provide insight into the most frequent and weighted keywords and topics of conversations. RESULTS: A total of 260 tweets and 156 comments from 4 YouTube videos were included in our analysis. Our data suggests that the most popular topics of conversation during the period sampled were related to communication strategies adopted during the booster vaccine rollout. These were noted to be divisive in nature and linked to wider conversations around racism and historical mistrust toward institutions. CONCLUSIONS: Our study suggests a shift in narrative from concerns about the COVID-19 vaccine itself, toward the strategies used in vaccination implementation, in particular the targeting of ethnic minority groups through vaccination campaigns. The implications for public health communication during crisis management in a pandemic context include acknowledging wider experiences of discrimination when addressing ethnic minority communities.

Making the most of big qualitative datasets: a living systematic review of analysis methods.

Introduction: Qualitative data provides deep insights into an individual's behaviors and beliefs, and the contextual factors that may shape these. Big qualitative data analysis is an emerging field that aims to identify trends and patterns in large qualitative datasets. The purpose of this review was to identify the methods used to analyse large bodies of qualitative data, their cited strengths and limitations and comparisons between manual and digital analysis approaches. Methods: A multifaceted approach has been taken to develop the review relying on academic, gray and media-based literature, using approaches such as iterative analysis, frequency analysis, text network analysis and team discussion. Results: The review identified 520 articles that detailed analysis approaches of big qualitative data. From these publications a diverse range of methods and software used for analysis were identified, with thematic analysis and basic software being most common. Studies were most commonly conducted in high-income countries, and the most common data sources were open-ended survey responses, interview transcripts, and first-person narratives. Discussion: We identified an emerging trend to expand the sources of qualitative data (e.g., using social media data, images, or videos), and develop new methods and software for analysis. As the qualitative analysis field may continue to change, it will be necessary to conduct further research to compare the utility of different big qualitative analysis methods and to develop standardized guidelines to raise awareness and support researchers in the use of more novel approaches for big qualitative analysis. Systematic review registration: https://osf.io/hbvsy/?view_only=.

Pandemic preparedness: why humanities and social sciences matter.

Whilst many lessons were learned from the COVID-19 pandemic, ongoing reflection is needed to develop and maintain preparedness for future outbreaks. Within the field of infectious disease and public health there remain silos and hierarchies in interdisciplinary work, with the risk that humanities and social sciences remain on the epistemological peripheries. However, these disciplines offer insights, expertise and tools that contribute to understanding responses to disease and uptake of interventions for prevention and treatment. In this Perspective, using examples from our own cross-disciplinary research and engagement programme on vaccine hesitancy in South Africa and the United Kingdom (UK), we propose closer integration of expertise, research and methods from humanities and social sciences into pandemic preparedness.

Online on the frontline: A longitudinal social media analysis of UK healthcare workers' attitudes to COVID-19 vaccines using the 5C framework.

This paper explores vaccine hesitancy among healthcare workers (HCWs) in the UK, where different COVID-19 vaccines were being rolled out through a national vaccination campaign from 2020 to 2022, consisting of a first and second dose programme. Through a mixed-method approach using qualitative discourse analysis and network analysis of Twitter data, we assessed HCW perceptions and views about the administration and delivery of COVID-19 vaccines in the United Kingdom (UK). We were also interested in exploring HCWs' personal experiences and attitudes towards taking COVID-19 vaccines themselves. We drew upon sociology, ethics, communication studies and used research methods concentrating on social media and media analysis. By employing the '5C framework' of 'confidence, complacency, constraints, calculation, and collective responsibility' we evaluated a longitudinal selection of tweets to capture relevant factors driving vaccination views and behaviours among HCWs. We found differing positions expressed about COVID-19 vaccines and policy during the first dose compared with the second, through a drop in confidence compounded by supply and access issues, as well the news of a vaccine mandate for HCWs by the UK government in 2021. HCWs asked calculation questions to the community or brought forward competing pieces of information about vaccine policy and guidelines. Constraint levels in access issues were noted, especially for those with work and caregiving responsibilities, and student nurses found they did not have equal vaccination access. HCWs also displayed collective responsibility on social platforms to both encourage vaccination and express concerns through the organisation of social action against vaccine mandates.

Beyond Information Provision: Analysis of the Roles of Structure and Agency in COVID-19 Vaccine Confidence in Ethnic Minority Communities.

People from Black and Asian backgrounds are more likely to die from COVID-19 but less likely to be vaccinated, threatening to exacerbate health inequalities already experienced by ethnic minority groups. The literature suggests that mistrust rooted in structural inequality (including socioeconomic position and experience of racism) may be a key barrier to COVID-19 vaccine uptake. Understanding and addressing structural inequality is likely to lead to longer-term impacts than information alone. The aim of this study is to draw on health and sociological theories of structure and agency to inform our understanding of how structural factors influence vaccine confidence. We conducted qualitative interviews and focus groups with 22 people from London and the surrounding areas from December 2021 to March 2022. Fourteen participants were members of the public from ethnic minority backgrounds, and seven were professionals working with the public to address concerns and encourage vaccine uptake. Our findings suggest that people from ethnic minority backgrounds make decisions regarding COVID-19 vaccination based on a combination of how they experience external social structures (including lack of credibility and clarity from political authority, neglect by health services, and structural racism) and internal processes (weighing up COVID-19 vaccine harms and benefits and concerns about vaccine development and deployment). We may be able to support knowledge accumulation through the provision of reliable and accessible information, particularly through primary and community care, but we recommend a number of changes to research, policy and practice that address structural inequalities. These include working with communities to improve ethnicity data collection, increasing funding allocation to health conditions where ethnic minority communities experience poorer outcomes, greater transparency and public engagement in the vaccine development process, and culturally adapted research recruitment processes.

Patients' Experiences of a Sarcoma Diagnosis: A Process Mapping Exercise of Diagnostic Pathways.

Patients with sarcoma often report prolonged time to diagnosis, which is attributed to the rarity of sarcoma and the low awareness of pre-diagnostic signs and symptoms. AIMS: To describe patients' experiences of pre-diagnostic signs/symptoms and pathways to diagnosis, including where help was sought, and the processes involved. METHODS: Mixed methods involving quantitative, qualitative and inductive thematic analyses using novel process mapping of patient journey data, as reported by the patients. We examined the time from symptom onset to first professional presentation (patient interval, PI), first consultation to diagnostic biopsy, first consultation to diagnosis (diagnostic interval) and first presentation to diagnosis (total interval). RESULTS: A total of 87 interviews were conducted over 5 months in 2017. Of these, 78 (40 males/38 females) were included. The sarcoma subtypes were bone (n = 21), soft tissue (n = 41), head and neck (n = 9) and gastro-intestinal (GIST; n = 7). Age at diagnosis was 13-24 (n = 7), 25-39 (n = 23), 40-64 (n = 34) and 65+ (n = 14) years. The median PI was 13 days (1-4971) and similar between sarcoma subtypes, with the exception of GIST (mPI = 2 days, (1-60). The longest mPI (31 days, range 4-762) was for those aged 13-24 years. The median diagnostic interval was 87.5 (range 0-5474 days). A total of 21 patients were misdiagnosed prior to diagnosis and symptoms were commonly attributed to lifestyle factors. CONCLUSIONS: Prolonged times to diagnosis were experienced by the majority of patients in our sample. Further research into the evolution of pre-diagnostic sarcoma symptoms is required to inform awareness interventions.

"Any idea how fast 'It's just a mask!' can turn into 'It's just a vaccine!'": From mask mandates to vaccine mandates during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Protests starting in the summer of 2020, notedly in the US and UK, have brought together two constituencies: pre-existing anti-vaccine groups and newly formed oppositional COVID-19 groups. The oppositional COVID-19 groups vary in composition and nature, but the central focus is a disagreement about the seriousness and threat of COVID-19 and with the public health measures to control COVID-19. What unites many disparate interests is an aversion to mandates. The compulsion to undertake particular public health activities such as mask-wearing and vaccination is a complex topic of public attitudes and beliefs alongside public health goals and messaging. We aim to analyse social media discussions about facemask wearing and the adoption of potential vaccines for COVID-19. Using media monitoring software MeltwaterTM, we analyse English-language tweets for one year from 1st June 2020 until 1st June 2021. We pay particular attention to connections in conversations between key topics of concern regarding masks and vaccines across social media networks. We track where ideas and activist behaviours towards both health interventions have originated, have similarities, and how they have changed over time. Our aim is to provide an overview of the key trends and themes of discussion concerning attitudes to and adoption of health measures in the control of COVID-19 and how publics react when confronted with mandatory policies. We draw on an already extensive literature about mandatory vaccination policies to inform our assessment, from psychology and behavioural science to ethics, political theory, sociology, and public policy.

Healthcare workers' perceptions and attitudes towards the UK's COVID-19 vaccination programme: a rapid qualitative appraisal.

OBJECTIVES: While there is research relating to perceptions of vaccines among healthcare workers (HCWs), the evidence base in relation to COVID-19 remains limited. The aim of this study was to explore HCWs' perceptions and attitudes towards vaccines and the COVID-19 vaccination programme in the UK, including their expectations and views on promoting vaccination to others. DESIGN: This study was designed as a rapid qualitative appraisal, integrating data from a review of UK policies and guidance on COVID-19 vaccination with data from in-depth semistructured telephone interviews with frontline HCWs in the UK. Data were analysed using framework analysis. PARTICIPANTS: Interviews were carried out with a purposive sample of HCWs from two large London-based hospital Trusts (n=24) and 24 government policies, and guidelines on the vaccination programme were reviewed. RESULTS: The level of uncertainty about the long-term safety of vaccines and efficacy against mutant strains made it difficult for HCWs to balance the benefits against the risks of vaccination. HCWs felt that government decisions on vaccine rollout had not been supported by evidence-based science, and this impacted their level of trust and confidence in the programme. The spread of misinformation online also impacted HCWs' attitudes towards vaccination, particularly among junior level and black, Asian and minority ethnic (BAME) HCWs. Most HCWs felt encouraged to promote vaccination to their patients, and the majority said they would advocate vaccination or engage in conversations about vaccination with others when relevant. CONCLUSION: In order to improve HCWs' trust and confidence in the UK's COVID-19 vaccination programme, there needs to be clarity about what is known and not known about the vaccines and transparency around the evidence-base supporting government decisions on vaccine rollout. Effort is also needed to dispel the spread of vaccine-related misinformation online and to address specific concerns, particularly among BAME and junior-level HCWs.

Long Covid: Online patient narratives, public health communication and vaccine hesitancy.

INTRODUCTION: This study combines quantitative and qualitative analyses of social media data collected through three key stages of the pandemic, to highlight the following: 'First wave' (March to May, 2020): negative consequences arising from a disconnect between official health communications, and unofficial Long Covid sufferers' narratives online.'Second wave' (October 2020 to January 2021): closing the 'gap' between official health communications and unofficial patient narratives, leading to a better integration between patient voice, research and services.'Vaccination phase' (January 2021, early stages of the vaccination programme in the UK): continuing and new emerging concerns. METHODS: We adopted a mixed methods approach involving quantitative and qualitative analyses of 1.38 million posts mentioning long-term symptoms of Covid-19, gathered across social media and news platforms between 1 January 2020 and 1 January 2021, on Twitter, Facebook, Blogs, and Forums. Our inductive thematic analysis was informed by our discourse analysis of words, and sentiment analysis of hashtags and emojis. RESULTS: Results indicate that the negative impacts arise mostly from conflicting definitions of Covid-19 and fears around the Covid-19 vaccine for Long Covid sufferers. Key areas of concern are: time/duration; symptoms/testing; emotional impact; lack of support and resources. CONCLUSIONS: Whilst Covid-19 is a global issue, specific sociocultural, political and economic contexts mean patients experience Long Covid at a localised level, needing appropriate localised responses. This can only happen if we build a knowledge base that begins with the patient, ultimately informing treatment and rehabilitation strategies for Long Covid.

Methods for Social Media Monitoring Related to Vaccination: Systematic Scoping Review.

BACKGROUND: Social media has changed the communication landscape, exposing individuals to an ever-growing amount of information while also allowing them to create and share content. Although vaccine skepticism is not new, social media has amplified public concerns and facilitated their spread globally. Multiple studies have been conducted to monitor vaccination discussions on social media. However, there is currently insufficient evidence on the best methods to perform social media monitoring. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to identify the methods most commonly used for monitoring vaccination-related topics on different social media platforms, along with their effectiveness and limitations. METHODS: A systematic scoping review was conducted by applying a comprehensive search strategy to multiple databases in December 2018. The articles' titles, abstracts, and full texts were screened by two reviewers using inclusion and exclusion criteria. After data extraction, a descriptive analysis was performed to summarize the methods used to monitor and analyze social media, including data extraction tools; ethical considerations; search strategies; periods monitored; geolocalization of content; and sentiments, content, and reach analyses. RESULTS: This review identified 86 articles on social media monitoring of vaccination, most of which were published after 2015. Although 35 out of the 86 studies used manual browser search tools to collect data from social media, this was time-consuming and only allowed for the analysis of small samples compared to social media application program interfaces or automated monitoring tools. Although simple search strategies were considered less precise, only 10 out of the 86 studies used comprehensive lists of keywords (eg, with hashtags or words related to specific events or concerns). Partly due to privacy settings, geolocalization of data was extremely difficult to obtain, limiting the possibility of performing country-specific analyses. Finally, 20 out of the 86 studies performed trend or content analyses, whereas most of the studies (70%, 60/86) analyzed sentiments toward vaccination. Automated sentiment analyses, performed using leverage, supervised machine learning, or automated software, were fast and provided strong and accurate results. Most studies focused on negative (n=33) and positive (n=31) sentiments toward vaccination, and may have failed to capture the nuances and complexity of emotions around vaccination. Finally, 49 out of the 86 studies determined the reach of social media posts by looking at numbers of followers and engagement (eg, retweets, shares, likes). CONCLUSIONS: Social media monitoring still constitutes a new means to research and understand public sentiments around vaccination. A wide range of methods are currently used by researchers. Future research should focus on evaluating these methods to offer more evidence and support the development of social media monitoring as a valuable research design.