The Role of Media and the Internet on Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting: A Case Study of Human Papillomavirus Vaccination

Department of Communication, University of Texas at San Antonio, San Antonio, Texas. Electronic address: .
Journal of Adolescent Health (Impact Factor: 3.61). 11/2013; 54(3). DOI: 10.1016/j.jadohealth.2013.09.005
Source: PubMed


This study aimed to determine the temporal association of print media coverage and Internet search activity with adverse events reports associated with the human papillomavirus vaccine Gardasil (HPV4) and the meningitis vaccine Menactra (MNQ) among United States adolescents.
We used moderated linear regression to test the relationships between print media reports in top circulating newspapers, Internet search activity, and reports to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) for HPV4 and MNQ during the first 2.5 years after Food and Drug Administration approval.
Compared with MNQ, HPV4 had more coverage in the print media and Internet search activity, which corresponded with the frequency of VAERS reports. In February 2007, we observed a spike in print media for HPV4. Although media coverage waned, Internet search activity remained stable and predicted the rise in HPV4-associated VAERS reports.
We demonstrate that media coverage and Internet search activity, in particular, may promote increased adverse event reporting. Public health officials who have long recognized the importance of proactive engagement with news media must now consider strategies for meaningful participation in Internet discussions.

Download full-text


Available from: Jan Marie Eberth, Jan 30, 2014
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Medication errors are an important public health problem and the subgroup of vaccination errors is relatively understudied. We characterized vaccination error reports to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), a U.S. passive surveillance system for vaccine adverse events (AEs). METHODS: Signs and symptoms of AEs described in VAERS reports and reported medical errors are coded using the Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities (MedDRA). We searched VAERS for U.S. reports of vaccination errors from 2000-2011 using 39 MedDRA medical error coding terms and categorized them into 11 error groups. We performed manual review of selected reports and available medical records. RESULTS: Of the 255,528 reports received by VAERS from 2000-2011, we identified 13,137 (5.1% ) vaccination error reports. The number of annual vaccination error reports increased from 10 reports in 2000 to 1,396 in 2011, peaking at 2,696 in 2008. Of the vaccination error reports, 8813 (67%) reported the error without any AE while 4,324 (32.9%) documented an AE. Among these reports the most common AEs were injection site erythema (n=583, 13.5%), fever (n=495, 11.4%) and injection site pain (n=468, 10.8%). The most common vaccination error reported was inappropriate schedule (i.e. wrong age, wrong schedule) (n=3,886, 29.6%), most often described for pediatric rotavirus vaccines (n=620, 16%). The second most common vaccination error was wrong vaccine administered (n=2,693, 20.5%). In a random sample of 100 reports of wrong vaccine administered, the most common mix-ups involved similar or related vaccines (i.e. Varicella and Zoster, pediatric DTaP and adult Tdap) in vaccination settings that served both children and adults. We identified an unexpected vaccination error: 25 reports of rotavirus vaccine eye splashes affecting mainly healthcare providers (16 associated with ocular symptoms). Cluster reports occurring in multiple individuals (range 2-500 persons) at the same vaccination location and date were noted 208 times; the most common error for clusters was expired drug administered. CONCLUSIONS: Although VAERS data have limitations of passive surveillance, the data show that potentially preventable vaccination errors have occurred since 2000 in individuals and in clusters. The most common vaccination errors, inappropriate schedule and wrong vaccine, as well as unexpected rotavirus eye splashes, may be prevented with education or packaging changes. Even though most vaccination errors are not temporally associated with an adverse health event, errors potentially could cause adverse events, incur additional costs, inconvenience patients and impact confidence in vaccination programs. Prevention strategies should be considered and evaluated.
    No preview · Conference Paper · Jun 2013
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Romania has the highest cervical cancer burden in Europe. Despite the implementation of two human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination programmes, the uptake remained extremely low and the programmes were discontinued. Given that media are a common source of information for the public and may influence vaccination decisions, this article sought to explore the content and quality of HPV vaccine media coverage in Romania. We conducted a content analysis of 271 media reports (from newspapers, magazines, videos and informational websites) published online between November 2007 and January 2012. Overall, results indicated that 31.4% of the materials were neutral, 28% were negative or extremely negative, 17% were mixed, while 23.6% were positive towards the vaccine. The most dominant vaccine-related concerns were side effects and insufficient testing. Elementary information about the vaccine and HPV was constantly left out and sometimes inaccuracies were found. Negatively disposed reports were more likely to contain incorrect data about vaccine efficacy and less likely to provide comprehensive information about the vaccine and HPV-related diseases. Some dimensions of media coverage varied across time and media outlets. The present findings suggest that educational interventions are greatly needed as a response to suboptimal and incomplete media coverage of HPV vaccination.
    No preview · Article · Jun 2014 · Health Education Research
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Many health-related decisions require choosing between two options, each with risks and benefits. When presented with such tradeoffs, people often make choices that fail to align with scientific evidence or with their own values. This study tested whether risk communication and values clarification methods could help parents and guardians make evidence-based, values-congruent decisions about children's influenza vaccinations. In 2013-2014 we conducted an online 2×2 factorial experiment in which a diverse sample of U.S. parents and guardians (n = 407) were randomly assigned to view either standard information about influenza vaccines or risk communication using absolute and incremental risk formats. Participants were then either presented or not presented with an interactive values clarification interface with constrained sliders and dynamic visual feedback. Participants randomized to the risk communication condition combined with the values clarification interface were more likely to indicate intentions to vaccinate (β = 2.10, t(399) = 2.63, p < 0.01). The effect was particularly notable among participants who had previously demonstrated less interest in having their children vaccinated against influenza (β = -2.14, t(399) = -2.06, p < 0.05). When assessing vaccination status reported by participants who agreed to participate in a follow-up study six months later (n = 116), vaccination intentions significantly predicted vaccination status (OR = 1.66, 95%CI (1.13, 2.44), p < 0.05) and rates of informed choice (OR = 1.51, 95%CI (1.07, 2.13), p < 0.012), although there were no direct effects of experimental factors on vaccination rates. Qualitative analysis suggested that logistical barriers impeded immunization rates. Risk communication and values clarification methods may contribute to increased vaccination intentions, which may, in turn, predict vaccination status if logistical barriers are also addressed. © 2015 Society for Risk Analysis.
    No preview · Article · May 2015 · Risk Analysis
Show more