Analysis of the Anti-Vaccine Movement in Social Networks: A Systematic Review

The aim of this study was to analyze social networks’ information about the anti-vaccine movement. A systematic review was performed in PubMed, Scopus, CINAHL and CUIDEN databases. The search equations were: “vaccine AND social network” and “vaccine AND (Facebook[title] OR Twitter[title] OR Instagra...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:International journal of environmental research and public health 2020-07, Vol.17 (15), p.5394
Hauptverfasser: Ortiz-Sánchez, Elvira, Velando-Soriano, Almudena, Pradas-Hernández, Laura, Vargas-Román, Keyla, Gómez-Urquiza, Jose L., Cañadas-De la Fuente, Guillermo A., Albendín-García, Luis
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:The aim of this study was to analyze social networks’ information about the anti-vaccine movement. A systematic review was performed in PubMed, Scopus, CINAHL and CUIDEN databases. The search equations were: “vaccine AND social network” and “vaccine AND (Facebook[title] OR Twitter[title] OR Instagram[title] OR YouTube[title])”. The final sample was n = 12, including only articles published in the last 10 years, in English or Spanish. Social networks are used by the anti-vaccine groups to disseminate their information. To do this, these groups use different methods, including bots and trolls that generate anti-vaccination messages and spread quickly. In addition, the arguments that they use focus on possible harmful effects and the distrust of pharmaceuticals, promoting the use of social networks as a resource for finding health-related information. The anti-vaccine groups are able to use social networks and their resources to increase their number and do so through controversial arguments, such as the economic benefit of pharmaceuticals or personal stories of children to move the population without using reliable or evidence-based content.
ISSN:1660-4601
1661-7827
1660-4601
DOI:10.3390/ijerph17155394