HPV vaccine reporting in Taiwan: media and politics, 2005–2018
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study analyzes the media coverage of HPV vaccines in Taiwan from 2005 to 2018, with a focus on adherence to World Health Organization (WHO) media guidelines and the influence of election cycles on reporting patterns. A content analysis of 911 articles from four major newspapers revealed peaks in 2008, 2014, and 2018 election years, coinciding with vaccines policy rollouts. Most articles (78 percent) appeared in national news sections, with medical professionals cited in 36.3 percent of cases. Coverage primarily emphasized vaccine policy (36.3 percent) and health education (36.4 percent), with 83 percent of articles portraying HPV vaccination positively and 88 percent explicitly endorsing it. However, only 42 percent adhered to WHO's media communication guidelines, and headlines often misaligned with article content. These findings highlight the media's advocacy role during key political and public health events, while underscoring the need for improved journalistic practices to ensure accurate, guideline-consistent vaccine communication.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".