From high hopes to disenchantment: A qualitative analysis of editorial cartoons on COVID-19 vaccines in Canadian newspapers.

In Canada, the first COVID-19 vaccine was approved for use in December 2020, marking the beginning of a large vaccination campaign. The campaign was not only unprecedented in terms of reach, but also with regards to the amount of information about vaccines that circulated in traditional and social media. This study's aim was to describe COVID-19 vaccine related discourses in Canada through an analysis of editorial cartoons. We collected 2172 cartoons about COVID-19 published between January 2020 and August 2022 in Canadian newspapers. These cartoons were downloaded and a first thematic analysis was conducted using the WHO-EPIWIN taxonomy (cause, illness, treatment, interventions, and information). From this, 389 cartoons related to COVID-19 vaccines were identified under the treatment category. These were subjected to a second thematic analysis to assess main themes (e.g., vaccine development, campaign progress, etc.), characters featured (e.g., politicians, public figures, public) and position with respect to vaccine (favorable, unfavorable, neutral). Six main themes emerged: Research and development of vaccines; Management of the vaccination campaign; Perceptions of and experiences with vaccination services; Measures and incentives to increase COVID-19 vaccine uptake; Criticism of the unvaccinated; and Effectiveness of vaccination. Our analysis revealed a shift in attitudes toward COVID-19 vaccination from high hopes to disenchantment, which may reflect some vaccine fatigue. In the future, public health authorities could face some challenges in maintaining confidence and high COVID-19 vaccine uptake.

"I Want People to Be Able to Make an Informed Choice": How Quebec naturopaths discuss vaccination in their practice.

Health care providers' recommendations can play an important role in individuals' vaccination decisions. Despite being one of the most popular complementary and alternative medicine (CAM), naturopathy is understudied in relation to vaccination decisions. We sought to address this gap through this study of vaccination perspectives of naturopathy practitioners in the province of Quebec, Canada. We conducted in-depth interviews with 30 naturopaths. Thematic analysis was conducted. Main themes were developed deductively (i.e., based on prior literature) and expanded through inductive coding of the data. Participants noted that they discuss vaccination in their practice, but only when clients asked questions or wanted advice. Naturopaths described refraining from explicitly recommending for or against vaccination. Instead, they focus on empowering their clients to make their own informed decision regarding vaccination. Most participants noted that they direct clients towards sources of information so that clients could decide for themselves, but some mentioned they discussed with clients what they considered to be risks associated with vaccination, as well as its benefits. These discussions were framed through a personalized and individual approach with clients.

A qualitative investigation of facilitators and barriers to accessing COVID-19 vaccines among Racialized and Indigenous Peoples in Canada.

Structural and systemic inequalities can contribute to susceptibility to COVID-19 disease and limited access to vaccines. Recognizing that Racialized and Indigenous Peoples may experience unique barriers to COVID-19 vaccination, this study explored early COVID-19 vaccine accessibility, including barriers and potential solutions to vaccine access, for these communities in Canada. We conducted semi-structured interviews about challenges to accessing COVID-19 vaccination with Racialized and Indigenous Peoples, including linguistic minorities and newcomers, in Spring 2021, just as COVID-19 vaccines were becoming more widely available in Canada. Participants were purposely selected from respondents to a Canadian national online survey. Three researchers analyzed the interviews for emergent themes using a descriptive content analysis approach in NVivo. At the time of the interview, interview participants (N = 27) intended to receive (n = 15) or had received (n = 11) at least one vaccine dose, or did not state their status (n = 1). Participants described multiple barriers to COVID-19 vaccination that they personally experienced and/or anticipated they or others could experience - including technology requirements, language barriers, lack of identification documentation, and travel challenges - as well as related solutions. These were organized into three broad categories: 1) COVID-19 disease and vaccination information, 2) vaccination booking procedures, and 3) vaccination sites. These structural and systemic barriers during the initial months of vaccine rollout substantially restricted participants' COVID-19 vaccination access, even when they were eager to get vaccinated, and should be addressed early in vaccine rollouts to facilitate optimal uptake for everyone everywhere.

Public health communication during the COVID-19 pandemic: perspectives of communication specialists, healthcare professionals, and community members in Quebec, Canada.

OBJECTIVES: Communication during a pandemic is key in ensuring adoption of preventive behaviours and limiting disease transmission. The aim of the study was to explore how communication specialists working in health and governmental institutions and healthcare professionals have communicated about COVID-19, and how different groups of the public have perceived official communications on COVID-19. METHODS: We conducted an exploratory qualitative study. Data were collected via individual semi-structured interviews and focus-group discussions. The Crisis and Emergency Risk Communication (CERC) model was used as a theoretical framework to guide data interpretation. RESULTS: We interviewed 6 communication specialists and 5 healthcare professionals. Three focus groups were held with 23 participants (8 young adults, 9 Quebecers of Asian ethnicity, and 6 Quebecers who suffered harshly from economic consequences of the pandemic and measures). Although daily press conferences were rapidly implemented in Quebec, participants highlighted several communication challenges, including accuracy and credibility of information in a context of uncertainties and rapidly evolving knowledge. Participants also identified paternalism, stigmatization of some communities, and issues with promoting action and mobilization of some subpopulations as communication challenges. CONCLUSION: Our study showed that the six core CERC principles have not all been applied systematically in communication interventions in Quebec. Despite some limitations, messages about COVID-19 risk were clearly and consistently communicated and were generally well understood by most Quebecers.

RéSUMé: OBJECTIFS: La communication en temps de pandémie joue un rôle clé dans l'adoption des comportements préventifs et le contrôle de la transmission de la maladie. Cette étude visait à explorer comment les spécialistes de la communication travaillant dans les institutions gouvernementales et de santé et les professionnels de la santé ont communiqué sur la COVID-19 et comment les différents groupes du public ont perçu les communications officielles sur la COVID-19. MéTHODE: Les données de cette étude qualitative exploratoire ont été recueillies à l'aide d'entretiens individuels semi-structurés et de groupes de discussion. Le modèle de la communication des risques en situation de crise et d'urgence (CERC) a été utilisé comme cadre théorique pour guider l'interprétation des données. RéSULTATS: Nous avons rencontré 6 experts en communication et 5 professionnels de la santé. Trois groupes de discussion ont eu lieu avec 23 participants (8 jeunes adultes, 9 Québécois d'origine asiatique et 6 Québécois ayant subi des conséquences financières importantes à cause de la pandémie et des mesures sanitaires). Bien que des conférences de presse quotidiennes aient été rapidement mises en place au Québec, les participants ont souligné plusieurs défis de communication, notamment en ce qui concerne l'exactitude et la crédibilité de l'information dans un contexte d'incertitudes et d'évolution rapide des connaissances. Les participants ont également identifié le paternalisme, la stigmatisation de certaines communautés et les problèmes de promotion de l'action et de mobilisation au sein de certaines sous-populations comme des défis de communication. CONCLUSION: Notre étude a démontré que les six principes fondamentaux du CERC n'ont pas tous été appliqués systématiquement dans les interventions de communication au Québec. Malgré certaines limites, les messages sur le risque lié à la COVID-19 ont été communiqués de manière claire et cohérente et ont été généralement bien compris par la plupart des Québécois.

"I don't think there's a point for me to discuss it with my patients": exploring health care providers' views and behaviours regarding COVID-19 vaccination.

BACKGROUND: Health care providers' knowledge and attitudes about vaccines are important determinants of their own vaccine uptake, their intention to recommend vaccines, and their patients' vaccine uptake. This qualitative study' objective was to better understand health care providers' vaccination decisions, their views on barriers to COVID-19 vaccine acceptance and proposed solutions, their opinions on vaccine policies, and their perceived role in discussing COVID-19 vaccination with patients. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews on perceptions of COVID-19 vaccines were conducted with Canadian health care providers (N = 14) in spring 2021. A qualitative thematic analysis using NVivo was conducted. RESULTS: Participants had positive attitudes toward vaccination and were vaccinated against COVID-19 or intended to do so once eligible (two delayed their first dose). Only two were actively promoting COVID-19 vaccination to their patients; others either avoided discussing the topic or only provided answers when asked questions. Participants' proposed solutions to enhance COVID-19 vaccine uptake in the public were in relation to access to vaccination services, information in multiple languages, and community outreach. Most participants were in favor of mandatory vaccination policies and had mixed views on the potential impact of the Canadian vaccine-injury support program. CONCLUSIONS: While health care providers are recognized as a key source of information regarding vaccines, participants in our study did not consider it their role to provide advice on COVID-19 vaccination. This is a missed opportunity that could be avoided by ensuring health care providers have the tools and training to feel confident in engaging in vaccine discussions with their patients.

Stigma and blame related to COVID-19 pandemic: A case-study of editorial cartoons in Canada.

The COVID-19 pandemic represents not only the spread of a highly contagious and potentially fatal virus, but also an outbreak of theories, rumors, discourses and representations trying to make sense of a crisis. In this article, we explore the issue of blame and stigma in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic in Canada. We do so by studying editorial cartoons published about COVID-19 in ten mainstream Canadian newspapers between January 2020 and March 2021. We identified 203 editorial cartoons that highlight common discourses which blame or stigmatize specific groups of people for the origin or transmission of COVID-19, or for their behavior during the pandemic. The cartoons focused on four groups: 1) people of Chinese origin or descent and of other national/geographic provenance (Americans, Canadians from specific provinces, urban residents); 2) international travelers; 3) people who do not respect the preventive measures to contain the pandemic; and 4) people who question or criticize the scientific discourses about COVID-19. Our analysis revealed an "othering process" common in times of pandemic. Our analysis of editorial cartoons in Canada also uncovered a moralization around the respect of the counter measures against COVID-19. These editorial cartoons largely divide the population into two groups: 1) "virtuous" people who are "selfless" and "smart" and who respect the public health preventive measures; 2) those who are "immoral", "self-centered", "silly" and even "stupid", who do not respect the recommended measures to prevent the transmission of COVID-19. While negatively portraying these individuals may help promote adherence to the recommended measures, it also can exacerbate polarization. Analyzing editorial cartoons can be a useful approach to rapidly gather information on attitudes and feelings in the public at a specific time and place.

Infodemic Signal Detection During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Development of a Methodology for Identifying Potential Information Voids in Online Conversations.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has been accompanied by an infodemic: excess information, including false or misleading information, in digital and physical environments during an acute public health event. This infodemic is leading to confusion and risk-taking behaviors that can be harmful to health, as well as to mistrust in health authorities and public health responses. The World Health Organization (WHO) is working to develop tools to provide an evidence-based response to the infodemic, enabling prioritization of health response activities. OBJECTIVE: In this work, we aimed to develop a practical, structured approach to identify narratives in public online conversations on social media platforms where concerns or confusion exist or where narratives are gaining traction, thus providing actionable data to help the WHO prioritize its response efforts to address the COVID-19 infodemic. METHODS: We developed a taxonomy to filter global public conversations in English and French related to COVID-19 on social media into 5 categories with 35 subcategories. The taxonomy and its implementation were validated for retrieval precision and recall, and they were reviewed and adapted as language about the pandemic in online conversations changed over time. The aggregated data for each subcategory were analyzed on a weekly basis by volume, velocity, and presence of questions to detect signals of information voids with potential for confusion or where mis- or disinformation may thrive. A human analyst reviewed and identified potential information voids and sources of confusion, and quantitative data were used to provide insights on emerging narratives, influencers, and public reactions to COVID-19-related topics. RESULTS: A COVID-19 public health social listening taxonomy was developed, validated, and applied to filter relevant content for more focused analysis. A weekly analysis of public online conversations since March 23, 2020, enabled quantification of shifting interests in public health-related topics concerning the pandemic, and the analysis demonstrated recurring voids of verified health information. This approach therefore focuses on the detection of infodemic signals to generate actionable insights to rapidly inform decision-making for a more targeted and adaptive response, including risk communication. CONCLUSIONS: This approach has been successfully applied to identify and analyze infodemic signals, particularly information voids, to inform the COVID-19 pandemic response. More broadly, the results have demonstrated the importance of ongoing monitoring and analysis of public online conversations, as information voids frequently recur and narratives shift over time. The approach is being piloted in individual countries and WHO regions to generate localized insights and actions; meanwhile, a pilot of an artificial intelligence-based social listening platform is using this taxonomy to aggregate and compare online conversations across 20 countries. Beyond the COVID-19 pandemic, the taxonomy and methodology may be adapted for fast deployment in future public health events, and they could form the basis of a routine social listening program for health preparedness and response planning.