• FluTrackers.com Inc. does not provide medical advice. Information on this web site is collected from various internet resources, and the FluTrackers board of directors makes no warranty to the safety, efficacy, correctness or completeness of the information posted on this site by any author or poster. The information collated here is for instructional and/or discussion purposes only and is NOT intended to diagnose or treat any disease, illness, or other medical condition. Every individual reader or poster should seek advice from their personal physician/healthcare practitioner before considering or using any interventions that are discussed on this website. By continuing to access this website you agree to consult your personal physican before using any interventions posted on this website, and you agree to hold harmless FluTrackers.com Inc., the board of directors, the members, and all authors and posters for any effects from use of any medication, supplement, vitamin or other substance, device, intervention, etc. mentioned in posts on this website, or other internet venues referenced in posts on this website.
  • We are not asking for any donations. Do not donate to any entity who says they are raising funds for us.

BMC Public Health . A thematic analysis of UK COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy discussions on Twitter

tetano

Editor, Senior Moderator
BMC Public Health


. 2025 Jan 7;25(1):61.
doi: 10.1186/s12889-024-21125-0. A thematic analysis of UK COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy discussions on Twitter

Reeshma Jameel[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Sheila Greenfield[SUP] 2 [/SUP], Anna Lavis[SUP] 3 [/SUP]



Affiliations
Abstract

Background: Following UK approval of the Pfizer-BioNTech and Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccines on 2/12/20 and 30/12/20 respectively, discussions about them emerged on the social media platform Twitter, (now 'X'). Previous research has shown that Twitter/ X is used by the UK public to engage with public health announcements and that social media influences public opinions of vaccines, including COVID-19 vaccines, globally. This study explored discussions on Twitter posted in response to the UK government's posts introducing the Pfizer-BioNTech and Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccines. The aim was to investigate vaccine hesitant views, and thereby identify barriers and facilitators to COVID-19 vaccine uptake in the UK.
Methods: Online ethnography was used to collect responses ('tweet replies') to 14 Twitter posts published by officials or departments of the UK government on the dates the Pfizer-BioNTech and Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccines received approval from the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (2/12/20 and 30/12/20, respectively). 16,508 responses were collected and those expressing vaccine hesitancy were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis.
Results: Three themes that underpinned Twitter posters' vaccine hesitancy were identified: (1) Concerns about vaccine development and safety, (2) Information, misinformation and disinformation, (3) Distrust: Politics and 'Big Pharma'. From these themes, eight barriers and eight facilitators to UK COVID-19 vaccine uptake were identified.
Conclusion: This paper highlights key obstacles to COVID-19 vaccine acceptance in the UK based on views from Twitter and contributes to the emerging literature on the relationship between social media and the public response to COVID-19 vaccines. In so doing, this analysis offers insights that are useful for the development of vaccine communication strategies more broadly, both in and beyond future pandemics, to ensure that public concerns are addressed, and misinformation and disinformation are appropriately countered.

Keywords: COVID-19 vaccines; Online ethnography; Qualitative research; Social media; Thematic analysis; Twitter; UK; Vaccine hesitancy.

 
Back
Top Bottom