In the early 2000s, there was a shift in the use of the internet. Individuals on the internet began seeking information from other creators and creating their own content. These online communities allowed individuals to communicate across the globe, gravitating toward people like them or those who shared similar beliefs. Conversations around vaccinations have been particularly polarizing across social media even though scientific literature continually validates their safety and effectiveness. This study will explore whether online public discourse about vaccinations changes before and after major scientific publications, and will measure what is related to social engagement around vaccinations on Twitter. In September 2018, two weeks' worth of Twitter posts (n = 2,919) discussing vaccinations were collected, coded, and analyzed before and after two major 2014 scientific publications. Linear regression analyses examined variables related to engagement with vaccination-related Tweets pre- and postpublication. Antivaccine-related Tweets decreased by over 25% after scientific publications, while provaccine Tweets increased by 16.6%. Regression models suggest verification status and number of followers were the strongest predictors of Twitter engagement. Findings indicate that scientific publications might affect what people public health information people share online, and how people engage with online content. In a time when false information is easily spread online, this study suggests the need for continual scientific publication on "hot topics," and urges researchers to partner with influential individuals on social media to disseminate effective, evidence-based, and user-friendly public health information to the public.
Keywords: advocacy; audience/consumer analysis; consumer health; health literacy; health research; immunization; mass media; media advocacy; social marketing/health communication.