Government-Nongovernmental Organization (NGO) Collaboration in Macao’s COVID-19 Vaccine Promotion: Social Media Case Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic triggered unprecedented global vaccination efforts, with social media being a popular tool for vaccine promotion. OBJECTIVE: This study probes into Macao's COVID-19 vaccine communication dynamics, with a focus on the multifaceted impacts of government agendas on social media. METHODS: We scrutinized 22,986 vaccine-related Facebook posts from January 2020 to August 2022 in Macao. Using automated content analysis and advanced statistical methods, we unveiled intricate agenda dynamics between government and nongovernment entities. RESULTS: "Vaccine importance" and "COVID-19 risk" were the most prominent topics co-occurring in the overall vaccine communication. The government tended to emphasize "COVID-19 risk" and "vaccine effectiveness," while regular users prioritized vaccine safety and distribution, indicating a discrepancy in these agendas. Nonetheless, the government has limited impact on regular users in the aspects of vaccine importance, accessibility, affordability, and trust in experts. The agendas of government and nongovernment users intertwined, illustrating complex interactions. CONCLUSIONS: This study reveals the influence of government agendas on public discourse, impacting environmental awareness, public health education, and the social dynamics of inclusive communication during health crises. Inclusive strategies, accommodating public concerns, and involving diverse stakeholders are paramount for effective social media communication during health crises.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.014 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".