The Communication Initiative
Development action with informed and engaged societies
The Communication Initiative
As of March 15 2025, The Communication Initiative (The CI) platform is operating at a reduced level, with no new content being posted to the global website and registration/login functions disabled. (La Iniciativa de Comunicación, or CILA, will keep running.) While many interactive functions are no longer available, The CI platform remains open for public use, with all content accessible and searchable until the end of 2025. 

Please note that some links within our knowledge summaries may be broken due to changes in external websites. The denial of access to the USAID website has, for instance, left many links broken. We can only hope that these valuable resources will be made available again soon. In the meantime, our summaries may help you by gleaning key insights from those resources. 

A heartfelt thank you to our network for your support and the invaluable work you do.
Time to read
3 minutes
Print
a- a+
Read so far

Where are the online conversations on vaccination and why we are not there?

2 comments

Recently I undertook the research Engaging “natural spaces” - Immunization and social media in Ukraine which is summarised at this page. That research focuses on how different communities in Ukraine use social media and engage in communication about polio, vaccination and routine immunisation.

 

The results showed an impressive volume of daily communication about vaccination occuring outside pages run by health or governmental organisations but within “natural spaces” where residents of a particular city or parents gather for communication to support their daily lives.

 

The parents’ groups, in particular, showed how active those platforms can be. Often created only for mothers under the topic of child-support allowance, they unite over 1 million personal accounts to sell clothes, discuss children’s products and talk about child health. Vaccination-related questions appear all day long with the most active discussions happening at night time, while children are in bed! Mothers ask advice from their peers, checking on things such as whether vaccination is advisable if their child is ill and reporting on reactions following vaccination (often attaching amateur pictures made with smartphones of the inoculation place and asking if it not too red or too big). The presence of health professionals to address those questions is limited. Being an open space, any information can be easily circulated by-passing standard health filters.

 

The questions derived from this data are the following. Please join the discussion and share your opinion and insights:

 

1.     How can we engage with target audiences, who tend to communicate inside their “natural” and comfortable platforms?

2.     What mechanisms for transferring accurate and credible information about polio and vaccination can we use?

3.     Is there a place for these particular tactics in the overall communication strategy on social media that mostly adopt traditional health communication approaches (eg push messages, games, videos, sponsored content, posters)?

4.     What is the role of medical professionals in this process and how can we build bridges between professionals and the more general audiences in such groups?

Thanks

 
Anna

Comments

User Image
Submitted by saragorm (not verified) on Wed, 06/21/2017 - 09:08 Permalink

Discussion questions:

1.       I’m curious about any data they may have collected about how the content of concerns might vary across different types of vaccines. I’ve studied this a bit in the U.S. and it’s definitely the case that vaccine hesitancy is very different for something like the flu vaccine versus the MMR. I’m curious about whether the same phenomenon exists in their observations in Ukraine and what these variations look like in that context.

2.       The paper discusses parental concerns about vaccines cropping up often after noticing how their children react to them. I’m curious about whether people posted about concerns or fears related to vaccines before actually bringing their kids in or if posting afterwards was more common.

3.       Building on the question above, what exactly did it seem like parents were seeking out when they posted in most cases? Was it mostly an attempt to get factual information about vaccine safety or was it more a form of emotional outreach in which people were mostly seeking support? Were they looking for help making a decision about vaccines or were most posts after the fact?

4.       Does the group have plans to test any of interventions mentioned at the end of the paper?

5.       There has been a lot of discussion about “vaccine hesitancy” versus flat-out “anti-vaccine” individuals. This is because we recognize that a lot of people are “in the middle” – that is, they haven’t made up their mind about vaccines but they do have significant concerns. It’s often harder to study these people’s attitudes because they often tend to be a bit quieter on online forums. The people at the extremes tend to be louder and more present. Did this study produce any insights into those people in the middle? Can we glean anything about the process these people go through and what persuades them?

 

Submitted by Anna Postovoitova on Mon, 07/03/2017 - 08:41 Permalink

Thank you, Sara, for your questions! And below are my thoughts:

1. The content of concerns are quite similar, but the volume and sentiment of the conversations about a certain vaccine vary. It depends on the overall media coverage in the country, delivery of vaccines or reactions a child may experience after vaccination. Recently, for example, online conversations about DTP vaccines were the most popular, because parents actively reported on the reactions following vaccination (high temperature, redness at the injection side etc.). Now, with the increase of measles cases in Ukraine, the MMR vaccine is getting more attention from the audience on social media. 

2. Both types of concerns - about preparation and reactions following vaccination - are common in the conversations. Before vaccination parents share concerns and ask if the vaccination is allowed with the certain health condition a child may have or asking other parents to share experience how their children feel after getting vaccinated.

3. It seems that parents are looking for an advice from other members to make a decision about either to vaccinate a child or not. And in making that decision they rely on/listen to the comments, information and personal experience shared by other members. Those answers may include links to resources and information (pro- or anti-vaccination). 

4. We are planning to test some of the key recommendations. There is a big question how to build an interaction with those audiences within their "natural" spaces, so please share any ideas/suggestions you may have.

5. The majority of mothers who are members of parents' groups don't have formed an opinion about vaccination, so, as you said, are "people in the middle". They actively contribute to the discussions and listen to their peers. And some opinion polls posted online show that information shared within such platforms may influence the parents' opinions on child immunization.

Please, write any other questions or comments you may have. Would be glad to hear your thoughts!