The Emerging Landscape of Social Media Influencers in Public Health Collaborations: A Scoping Review.

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.

A decade of PrEP: the evolution of HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis content and sentiments in South African print news media, 2012-2021.

After nearly a decade of HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) rollout in sub-Saharan Africa, there has been limited study of PrEP messaging in news media. We selected twenty South African newspapers with the highest circulation volumes to retrieve articles published in 2012-2021 mentioning PrEP (N = 249). Using inductive content analysis, we developed a structured codebook to characterise PrEP-related content and sentiments, as well as their evolution over time, in the South African press. Many articles espoused favourable attitudes towards PrEP (52%), but a sizeable fraction espoused unfavourable attitudes (11%). Relative to PrEP-favourable articles, PrEP-unfavourable articles were significantly more likely to emphasise the drawbacks/consequences of PrEP use, including adherence/persistence requirements (52% vs. 24%, p = .007), cost (48% vs. 11%, p < .001), and risk compensation (52% vs. 5%, p < .001). Nevertheless, the presence of these drawbacks/consequences in print media largely declined over time. Key populations (e.g. adolescents, female sex workers) were frequently mentioned potential PrEP candidates. Despite message variations over time, prevention effectiveness and adherence/persistence requirements were the most widely cited PrEP benefits and drawbacks, respectively. Study findings demonstrate the dynamic nature of PrEP coverage in the South African press, likely in response to PrEP scale-up and real-world PrEP implementation during the study period.

Leveraging a Peer-to-Peer Approach to Mitigate Vaccine Misinformation and Improve Vaccine Communication During a Pandemic: Experiences From the Development of a Massive Open Online Course.

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.

Vaccine Communication: Appeals and Messengers Most Effective for COVID-19 Vaccine Uptake in Ukraine.

Throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, vaccine communication has been a challenge, particularly as some populations may be highly distrustful of information from public health or government institutions. To better understand the different communication needs in Ukraine, an online survey panel of 168 Ukrainian participants viewed six COVID-19 vaccination ads with three variations on vaccine messaging appeals (potential economic impacts of COVID-19 infection COVID-19 disease outcomes, and social norms related to vaccination) and two different messengers (a peer or a health provider). The ad featuring a health outcome appeal delivered by a healthcare provider was most favored (n = 53, 31.6%); however, across demographic categories, including vaccine hesitancy categories, participants expressed high levels of approval for all six variations of the COVID-19 vaccine ads. When participants ranked reasons why someone may not accept the COVID-19 vaccine, the most prevalent beliefs identified were that the vaccine was not safe, and that the vaccine was not effective. Findings from this study suggest that vaccine appeals focused on health outcomes delivered by healthcare providers are preferred by most individuals in Ukraine; however, individuals are motivated by a myriad of factors suggesting that for vaccine messaging to be most effective, communication should be varied in both appeal and messenger.

What message appeal and messenger are most persuasive for COVID-19 vaccine uptake: Results from a 5-country survey in India, Indonesia, Kenya, Nigeria, and Ukraine.

Effective strategies to encourage COVID-19 vaccination should consider how health communication can be tailored to specific contexts. Our study aimed to evaluate the influence of three specific messaging appeals from two kinds of messengers on COVID-19 vaccine acceptance in diverse countries. We surveyed 953 online participants in five countries (India, Indonesia, Kenya, Nigeria, and Ukraine). We assessed participants' perceptions of three messaging appeals of vaccination-COVID-19 disease health outcomes, social norms related to COVID-19 vaccination, and economic impact of COVID-19-from two messengers, healthcare providers (HCP), and peers. We examined participants' ad preference and vaccine hesitancy using multivariable multinomial logistic regression. Participants expressed a high level of approval for all the ads. The healthcare outcome-healthcare provider ad was most preferred among participants from India, Indonesia, Nigeria, and Ukraine. Participants in Kenya reported a preference for the health outcome-peer ad. The majority of participants in each country expressed high levels of vaccine hesitancy. However, in a final logistic regression model participant characteristics were not significantly related to vaccine hesitancy. These findings suggest that appeals related to health outcomes, economic benefit, and social norms are all acceptable to diverse general populations, while specific audience segments (i.e., mothers, younger adults, etc.) may have preferences for specific appeals over others. Tailored approaches, or approaches that are developed with the target audience's concerns and preferences in mind, will be more effective than broad-based or mass appeals.

Message testing in India for COVID-19 vaccine uptake: What appeal and what messenger are most persuasive?

Few studies have examined the relationships between the different aspects of vaccination communication and vaccine attitudes. We aimed to evaluate the influence of three unique messaging appeal framings of vaccination from two types of messengers on COVID-19 vaccine acceptance in India. We surveyed 534 online participants in India using Amazon Mechanical Turk (MTurk) from December 2021 through January 2022. We assessed participants' perception of three messaging appeals of vaccination - COVID-19 disease health outcomes, social norms related to vaccination, and economic impact of COVID-19 - from two messengers, healthcare providers (HCP) and peers. Using a multivariable multinomial logistic regression, we examined participants' ad preference and vaccine hesitancy. Participants expressed a high level of approval for all of the ads, with >80% positive responses for all questions across ads. Overall ads delivered by health care workers were preferred by a majority of participants in our study (n = 381, 71.4%). Ad preference ranged from 3.6% (n = 19) social norm/peer ad to 32.4% (n = 173) health outcome/HCP ad and half of participants preferred the health outcome ad (n = 279, 52.3%). Additionally, vaccine hesitancy was not related to preference (p = .513): HCP vs. peer ads (p = .522); message type (p = .284). The results suggest that all three appeals tested were generally acceptable, as well as the two messenger types, although preference was for the health care provider messenger and health outcome appeal. Individuals are motivated and influenced by a multitude of factors, requiring vaccine messaging that is persuasive, salient, and induces contextually relevant action.