The recent vaccine-related infodemic has amplified public concerns, highlighting the need for proactive misinformation management. We describe how we enhanced the reporting surveillance system of Victoria's vaccine safety service, SAEFVIC, through the incorporation of new information sources for public sentiment analysis, topics of discussion, and hesitancies about vaccinations online. Using VaxPulse, a multi-step framework, we integrate adverse events following immunisation (AEFI) with sentiment analysis, demonstrating the importance of contextualising public concerns. Additionally, we emphasise the need to address non-English languages to stratify concerns across ethno-lingual communities, providing valuable insights for vaccine uptake strategies and combating mis/disinformation. The framework is applied to real-world examples and a case study on women's vaccine hesitancy, showcasing its benefits and adaptability by identifying public opinion from online media.

Vaccine hesitancy and misinformation are significant barriers to achieving widespread vaccination coverage. Smaller public health departments may lack the expertise or resources to craft effective vaccine messaging. This paper explores the potential of ChatGPT-augmented messaging to promote confidence in vaccination uptake. We conducted a survey in which participants chose between pairs of vaccination messages and assessed which was more persuasive and to what extent. In each pair, one message was the original, and the other was augmented by ChatGPT. At the end of the survey, participants were informed that half of the messages had been generated by ChatGPT. They were then asked to provide both quantitative and qualitative responses regarding how knowledge of a message's ChatGPT origin affected their impressions. Overall, ChatGPT-augmented messages were rated slightly higher than the original messages. These messages generally scored better when they were longer. Respondents did not express major concerns about ChatGPT-generated content, nor was there a significant relationship between participants' views on ChatGPT and their message ratings. Notably, there was a correlation between whether a message appeared first or second in a pair and its score. These results point to the potential of ChatGPT to enhance vaccine messaging, suggesting a promising direction for future research on human-AI collaboration in public health communication.

Background Advances in machine learning (ML) models have increased the capability of researchers to detect vaccine hesitancy in social media using Natural Language Processing (NLP). A considerable volume of research has identified the persistence of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy in discourse shared on various social media platforms. Methods Our objective in this study was to conduct a systematic review of research employing sentiment analysis or stance detection to study discourse towards COVID-19 vaccines and vaccination spread on Twitter (officially known as X since 2023). Following registration in the PROSPERO international registry of systematic reviews, we searched papers published from 1 January 2020 to 31 December 2023 that used supervised machine learning to assess COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy through stance detection or sentiment analysis on Twitter. We categorized the studies according to a taxonomy of five dimensions: tweet sample selection approach, self-reported study type, classification typology, annotation codebook definitions, and interpretation of results. We analyzed if studies using stance detection report different hesitancy trends than those using sentiment analysis by examining how COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy is measured, and whether efforts were made to avoid measurement bias. Results Our review found that measurement bias is widely prevalent in studies employing supervised machine learning to analyze sentiment and stance toward COVID-19 vaccines and vaccination. The reporting errors are sufficiently serious that they hinder the generalisability and interpretation of these studies to understanding whether individual opinions communicate reluctance to vaccinate against SARS-CoV-2. Conclusion Improving the reporting of NLP methods is crucial to addressing knowledge gaps in vaccine hesitancy discourse.

Can we simulate a sandbox society with generative agents to model human behavior, thereby reducing the over-reliance on real human trials for assessing public policies? In this work, we investigate the feasibility of simulating health-related decision-making, using vaccine hesitancy, defined as the delay in acceptance or refusal of vaccines despite the availability of vaccination services (MacDonald, 2015), as a case study. To this end, we introduce the VacSim framework with 100 generative agents powered by Large Language Models (LLMs). VacSim simulates vaccine policy outcomes with the following steps: 1) instantiate a population of agents with demographics based on census data; 2) connect the agents via a social network and model vaccine attitudes as a function of social dynamics and disease-related information; 3) design and evaluate various public health interventions aimed at mitigating vaccine hesitancy. To align with real-world results, we also introduce simulation warmup and attitude modulation to adjust agents' attitudes. We propose a series of evaluations to assess the reliability of various LLM simulations. Experiments indicate that models like Llama and Qwen can simulate aspects of human behavior but also highlight real-world alignment challenges, such as inconsistent responses with demographic profiles. This early exploration of LLM-driven simulations is not meant to serve as definitive policy guidance; instead, it serves as a call for action to examine social simulation for policy development.

This paper leverages large-language models (LLMs) to experimentally determine optimal strategies for scaling up social media content annotation for stance detection on HPV vaccine-related tweets. We examine both conventional fine-tuning and emergent in-context learning methods, systematically varying strategies of prompt engineering across widely used LLMs and their variants (e.g., GPT4, Mistral, and Llama3, etc.). Specifically, we varied prompt template design, shot sampling methods, and shot quantity to detect stance on HPV vaccination. Our findings reveal that 1) in general, in-context learning outperforms fine-tuning in stance detection for HPV vaccine social media content; 2) increasing shot quantity does not necessarily enhance performance across models; and 3) different LLMs and their variants present differing sensitivity to in-context learning conditions. We uncovered that the optimal in-context learning configuration for stance detection on HPV vaccine tweets involves six stratified shots paired with detailed contextual prompts. This study highlights the potential and provides an applicable approach for applying LLMs to research on social media stance and skepticism detection.

The COVID-19 pandemic exposed significant weaknesses in the healthcare information system. The overwhelming volume of misinformation on social media and other socioeconomic factors created extraordinary challenges to motivate people to take proper precautions and get vaccinated. In this context, our work explored a novel direction by analyzing an extensive dataset collected over two years, identifying the topics de/motivating the public about COVID-19 vaccination. We analyzed these topics based on time, geographic location, and political orientation. We noticed that while the motivating topics remain the same over time and geographic location, the demotivating topics rapidly. We also identified that intrinsic motivation, rather than external mandate, is more advantageous to inspire the public. This study addresses scientific communication and public motivation in social media. It can help public health officials, policymakers, and social media platforms develop more effective messaging strategies to cut through the noise of misinformation and educate the public about scientific findings.

Vaccine hesitancy is widespread, despite the government's information campaigns and the efforts of the World Health Organisation (WHO). Categorising the topics within vaccine-related narratives is crucial to understand the concerns expressed in discussions and identify the specific issues that contribute to vaccine hesitancy. This paper addresses the need for monitoring and analysing vaccine narratives online by introducing a novel vaccine narrative classification task, which categorises COVID-19 vaccine claims into one of seven categories. Following a data augmentation approach, we first construct a novel dataset for this new classification task, focusing on the minority classes. We also make use of fact-checker annotated data. The paper also presents a neural vaccine narrative classifier that achieves an accuracy of 84% under cross-validation. The classifier is publicly available for researchers and journalists.

Very few social media studies have been done on South African user-generated content during the COVID-19 pandemic and even fewer using hand-labelling over automated methods. Vaccination is a major tool in the fight against the pandemic, but vaccine hesitancy jeopardizes any public health effort. In this study, sentiment analysis on South African tweets related to vaccine hesitancy was performed, with the aim of training AI-mediated classification models and assessing their reliability in categorizing UGC. A dataset of 30000 tweets from South Africa were extracted and hand-labelled into one of three sentiment classes: positive, negative, neutral. The machine learning models used were LSTM, bi-LSTM, SVM, BERT-base-cased and the RoBERTa-base models, whereby their hyperparameters were carefully chosen and tuned using the WandB platform. We used two different approaches when we pre-processed our data for comparison: one was semantics-based, while the other was corpus-based. The pre-processing of the tweets in our dataset was performed using both methods, respectively. All models were found to have low F1-scores within a range of 45$\%$-55$\%$, except for BERT and RoBERTa which both achieved significantly better measures with overall F1-scores of 60$\%$ and 61$\%$, respectively. Topic modelling using an LDA was performed on the miss-classified tweets of the RoBERTa model to gain insight on how to further improve model accuracy.

Vaccine hesitancy continues to be a main challenge for public health officials during the COVID-19 pandemic. As this hesitancy undermines vaccine campaigns, many researchers have sought to identify its root causes, finding that the increasing volume of anti-vaccine misinformation on social media platforms is a key element of this problem. We explored Twitter as a source of misleading content with the goal of extracting overlapping cultural and political beliefs that motivate the spread of vaccine misinformation. To do this, we have collected a data set of vaccine-related Tweets and annotated them with the help of a team of annotators with a background in communications and journalism. Ultimately we hope this can lead to effective and targeted public health communication strategies for reaching individuals with anti-vaccine beliefs. Moreover, this information helps with developing Machine Learning models to automatically detect vaccine misinformation posts and combat their negative impacts. In this paper, we present Vax-Culture, a novel Twitter COVID-19 dataset consisting of 6373 vaccine-related tweets accompanied by an extensive set of human-provided annotations including vaccine-hesitancy stance, indication of any misinformation in tweets, the entities criticized and supported in each tweet and the communicated message of each tweet. Moreover, we define five baseline tasks including four classification and one sequence generation tasks, and report the results of a set of recent transformer-based models for them. The dataset and code are publicly available at https://github.com/mrzarei5/Vax-Culture.

Vaccine hesitancy has been a common concern, probably since vaccines were created and, with the popularisation of social media, people started to express their concerns about vaccines online alongside those posting pro- and anti-vaccine content. Predictably, since the first mentions of a COVID-19 vaccine, social media users posted about their fears and concerns or about their support and belief into the effectiveness of these rapidly developing vaccines. Identifying and understanding the reasons behind public hesitancy towards COVID-19 vaccines is important for policy markers that need to develop actions to better inform the population with the aim of increasing vaccine take-up. In the case of COVID-19, where the fast development of the vaccines was mirrored closely by growth in anti-vaxx disinformation, automatic means of detecting citizen attitudes towards vaccination became necessary. This is an important computational social sciences task that requires data analysis in order to gain in-depth understanding of the phenomena at hand. Annotated data is also necessary for training data-driven models for more nuanced analysis of attitudes towards vaccination. To this end, we created a new collection of over 3,101 tweets annotated with users' attitudes towards COVID-19 vaccination (stance). Besides, we also develop a domain-specific language model (VaxxBERT) that achieves the best predictive performance (73.0 accuracy and 69.3 F1-score) as compared to a robust set of baselines. To the best of our knowledge, these are the first dataset and model that model vaccine hesitancy as a category distinct from pro- and anti-vaccine stance.