BACKGROUND An infodemic is excess information, including false or misleading information, that spreads in digital and physical environments during a public health emergency. The COVID-19 pandemic has been accompanied by an unprecedented global infodemic that has led to confusion about the benefits of medical and public health interventions, with substantial impact on risk-taking and health-seeking behaviors, eroding trust in health authorities and compromising the effectiveness of public health responses and policies. Standardized measures are needed to quantify the harmful impacts of the infodemic in a systematic and methodologically robust manner, as well as harmonizing highly divergent approaches currently explored for this purpose. This can serve as a foundation for a systematic, evidence-based approach to monitoring, identifying, and mitigating future infodemic harms in emergency preparedness and prevention. OBJECTIVE In this paper, we summarize the Fifth World Health Organization (WHO) Infodemic Management Conference structure, proceedings, outcomes, and proposed actions seeking to identify the interdisciplinary approaches and frameworks needed to enable the measurement of the burden of infodemics. METHODS An iterative human-centered design (HCD) approach and concept mapping were used to facilitate focused discussions and allow for the generation of actionable outcomes and recommendations. The discussions included 86 participants representing diverse scientific disciplines and health authorities from 28 countries across all WHO regions, along with observers from civil society and global public health–implementing partners. A thematic map capturing the concepts matching the key contributing factors to the public health burden of infodemics was used throughout the conference to frame and contextualize discussions. Five key areas for immediate action were identified. RESULTS The 5 key areas for the development of metrics to assess the burden of infodemics and associated interventions included (1) developing standardized definitions and ensuring the adoption thereof; (2) improving the map of concepts influencing the burden of infodemics; (3) conducting a review of evidence, tools, and data sources; (4) setting up a technical working group; and (5) addressing immediate priorities for postpandemic recovery and resilience building. The summary report consolidated group input toward a common vocabulary with standardized terms, concepts, study designs, measures, and tools to estimate the burden of infodemics and the effectiveness of infodemic management interventions. CONCLUSIONS Standardizing measurement is the basis for documenting the burden of infodemics on health systems and population health during emergencies. Investment is needed into the development of practical, affordable, evidence-based, and systematic methods that are legally and ethically balanced for monitoring infodemics; generating diagnostics, infodemic insights, and recommendations; and developing interventions, action-oriented guidance, policies, support options, mechanisms, and tools for infodemic managers and emergency program managers.
Population Medicine considers the following types of articles:• Research Papers -reports of data from original research or secondary dataset analyses.• Review Papers -comprehensive, authoritative, reviews within the journal's scope.These include both systematic reviews and narrative reviews.• Short Reports -brief reports of data from original research.• Policy Case Studies -brief articles on policy development at a regional or national level.• Study Protocols -articles describing a research protocol of a study.• Methodology Papers -papers that present different methodological approaches that can be used to investigate problems in a relevant scientific field and to encourage innovation.• Methodology Papers -papers that present different methodological approaches that can be used to investigate problems in a relevant scientific field and to encourage innovation.
Population Medicine considers the following types of articles:• Research Papers -reports of data from original research or secondary dataset analyses.• Review Papers -comprehensive, authoritative, reviews within the journal's scope.These include both systematic reviews and narrative reviews.• Short Reports -brief reports of data from original research.• Policy Case Studies -brief articles on policy development at a regional or national level.• Study Protocols -articles describing a research protocol of a study.• Methodology Papers -papers that present different methodological approaches that can be used to investigate problems in a relevant scientific field and to encourage innovation.• Methodology Papers -papers that present different methodological approaches that can be used to investigate problems in a relevant scientific field and to encourage innovation.
CORRECTION article Front. Public Health, 30 October 2023Sec. Public Health Education and Promotion Volume 11 - 2023 | https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2023.1311055
Students experience fear, pain, and fainting during vaccinations at school. While evidence-based interventions exist, no Knowledge Translation (KT) interventions have been developed to mitigate these symptoms. A multidisciplinary team-the Pain Pain Go Away Team-was assembled to address this knowledge-to-care gap. This manuscript provides an overview of the methodology, knowledge products, and impact of an evidence-based KT program developed and implemented to improve the vaccination experience at school.We adapted knowledge and assessed the barriers to knowledge use via focus group interviews with key stakeholder groups involved in school-based vaccinations: students, nurses, school staff, and parents. Next, we developed project-specific goals and data collection tools and collected baseline data. We then created a multifaceted KT intervention called The CARD™ System (C-Comfort, A-Ask, R-Relax, D-Distract) to provide a framework for planning and delivering vaccinations using a student-centred approach. Selected KT tools from this framework were reviewed in additional focus groups held in all stakeholder groups. The multifaceted KT intervention was then finalized and implemented in stages in two projects including grade 7 students undergoing school vaccinations and impact on student outcomes (e.g., symptoms of fear, pain, dizziness) and process outcomes (e.g., utilization of interventions that reduce student symptoms, vaccination rate) were assessed.Participants reported that improving the vaccination experience is important. Based on participant feedback, an evidence-based multifaceted KT intervention called The CARD™ System was developed that addresses user needs and preferences. Selected KT tools of this intervention were demonstrated to be acceptable and to improve knowledge and attitudes about vaccination in the stakeholder groups. In two separate implementation projects, CARD™ helped grade 7 students prepare for vaccinations and positively impacted on their vaccination experiences. CARD™ improved vaccination experiences for other stakeholder groups as well. There was no evidence of an impact on school vaccination rates.We developed and implemented a promising multifaceted KT intervention called The CARD™ System to address vaccination-associated pain, fear, and fainting. Future research is recommended to determine impact in students of different ages and in different geographical regions and clinical contexts.
We conducted a small-scale implementation study that integrated The CARD™ System (C-Comfort, A-Ask, R-Relax, D-Distract)-a multifaceted knowledge translation intervention designed to improve the vaccination experience at school-within the school vaccination program.Mixed methods design, including a controlled clinical trial and focus group interviews. The experimental group included five schools whereby CARD™ was implemented. The control group included five schools whereby no changes were made. Focus groups were held at the end of the school year. For nurses trained in CARD™, additional focus groups were held at CARD™ training and after the first round of vaccine clinic visits. Outcomes included vaccination rate at school and adult stakeholder perceptions.Altogether, 323 students attended study schools. Fifty-five nurses, school staff, and parents participated in 15 focus groups. The school vaccination rate did not differ (P>0.05) between groups for round 1 clinics (76% versus 77%) or round 2 clinics (68% versus 70%). Participants reported acceptability, appropriateness, feasibility, and satisfaction with CARD™. Experimental group nurses were able to integrate CARD™ within usual activities, including clinic planning, student education, and clinic-day set-up and student vaccinations. Students in experimental schools were described by nurses and school staff as more prepared and less fearful during vaccinations. Nurses reported that CARD™ built on their practice; they had higher confidence in their ability to assess pain and fear and higher satisfaction with their ability to manage it. Nurses also reported improved collaboration with students and with each other. All stakeholder groups recommended continuing CARD™. Some additional time was required, primarily related to clinic planning activities and data collection for study purposes.CARD™ is a promising new approach for improving the delivery of vaccinations at school. Exploration of approaches to increase parental reach and monitoring of vaccination uptake rate over time are recommended.
Vaccine safety is a concern that continues to drive hesitancy and refusal in populations in low-and-middle income countries (LMICs). Communicating about vaccine safety is a strategy that can successfully change personal and community perceptions and behaviors toward vaccination. The COVID-19 infodemic emergency with the rapid rollout of new vaccines and new technology, demonstrated the need for good and effective vaccine safety communication. The Vaccine Safety Net (VSN), a WHO-led global network of websites that provide reliable information on vaccine safety offers the ideal environment for gathering web and social media analytics for measuring impact of vaccine safety messages. Its members work with a wide range of populations, in different geographic locations and at many levels including national, regional, and local. We propose to undertake a pilot study to evaluate the feasibility of implementing COVID-19 vaccine safety communications with VSN members working in LMICs and to assess the impact of communications on public knowledge, attitudes, and perceptions.
An infodemic is an overflow of information of varying quality that surges across digital and physical environments during an acute public health event. It leads to confusion, risk-taking, and behaviors that can harm health and lead to erosion of trust in health authorities and public health responses. Owing to the global scale and high stakes of the health emergency, responding to the infodemic related to the pandemic is particularly urgent. Building on diverse research disciplines and expanding the discipline of infodemiology, more evidence-based interventions are needed to design infodemic management interventions and tools and implement them by health emergency responders.The World Health Organization organized the first global infodemiology conference, entirely online, during June and July 2020, with a follow-up process from August to October 2020, to review current multidisciplinary evidence, interventions, and practices that can be applied to the COVID-19 infodemic response. This resulted in the creation of a public health research agenda for managing infodemics.As part of the conference, a structured expert judgment synthesis method was used to formulate a public health research agenda. A total of 110 participants represented diverse scientific disciplines from over 35 countries and global public health implementing partners. The conference used a laddered discussion sprint methodology by rotating participant teams, and a managed follow-up process was used to assemble a research agenda based on the discussion and structured expert feedback. This resulted in a five-workstream frame of the research agenda for infodemic management and 166 suggested research questions. The participants then ranked the questions for feasibility and expected public health impact. The expert consensus was summarized in a public health research agenda that included a list of priority research questions.The public health research agenda for infodemic management has five workstreams: (1) measuring and continuously monitoring the impact of infodemics during health emergencies; (2) detecting signals and understanding the spread and risk of infodemics; (3) responding and deploying interventions that mitigate and protect against infodemics and their harmful effects; (4) evaluating infodemic interventions and strengthening the resilience of individuals and communities to infodemics; and (5) promoting the development, adaptation, and application of interventions and toolkits for infodemic management. Each workstream identifies research questions and highlights 49 high priority research questions.Public health authorities need to develop, validate, implement, and adapt tools and interventions for managing infodemics in acute public health events in ways that are appropriate for their countries and contexts. Infodemiology provides a scientific foundation to make this possible. This research agenda proposes a structured framework for targeted investment for the scientific community, policy makers, implementing organizations, and other stakeholders to consider.
COVID-19 has led to disruption in routine immunization programs around the globe and here in Canada. The National Advisory Committee on Immunization (NACI) in Canada has indicated that this sets the stage for serious outbreaks of vaccine-preventable diseases. The World Health Organization has evidence-based guidance on how to address missed opportunities for vaccination, albeit predominately applicable for low- and middle-income countries. In Canada, immunization applies beyond infant and childhood immunization, with immunization across the life course being recommended by NACI. Three components stand out and must be integrated and used concurrently for best effect on catch-up in Canada: (1) Identify who has been missed across the life course; (2) detect delivery gaps, adapt and adjust, and develop multipronged tailored strategies for catch-up; and (3) communicate, document, evaluate and readjust the immunization programs. All must be adapted to the reality of the evolving COVID-19 pandemic. We cannot go back to a pre-COVID-19 world. However, ensuring that routine immunization and catch-up programs are done well during this pandemic strengthens the immunization foundation in Canada for when COVID-19 vaccines become available.
Increasing the comfort of vaccine delivery at school is needed to improve the immunization experience for students. We created the CARD™ (C—Comfort, A—Ask, R—Relax and D—Distract) system to address this clinical care gap. Originally designed for grade 7 students, this study examined the perceptions of grade 9 students of CARD™. Grade 9 students who had experience with school-based immunizations, either as recipients or onlookers (n = 7; 100% females 14 years old) participated. Students answered pre–post surveys, reviewed CARD™ educational materials and participated in a semi-structured focus group discussion. The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) was used as the framework for analysis of qualitative data. Participants reported positive perceptions of CARD™ educational materials and that CARD™ could fit into the school immunization process. CARD™ improved knowledge about effective coping interventions and was recommended for education of both nurses and students. The results provide preliminary evidence that CARD™ is acceptable and appropriate for implementation in grade 9 school-based immunizations.
