MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4417331668 · doi:10.2196/84540

A Social Media Campaign to Promote COVID-19 Vaccination: Cost-Effectiveness Analysis

2025· article· en· W4417331668 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Michael W. Long, Jeffrey B. Bingenheimer, Khadidiatou Ndiaye, Dante Donati, Nandan Rao, Selinam Akaba, Sohail Agha, W. Douglas Evans

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Public Health and Surveillance · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicVaccine Coverage and Hesitancy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSocial mediaVaccinationMedia campaignMedia coverageHealth communicationSocial cost

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Vaccine hesitancy has increased in recent decades internationally, which sets up a critical barrier to the rapid deployment of novel vaccines against infection with SARS-CoV-2. OBJECTIVE: This study used a quasi-experimental design to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of a social media intervention to reduce COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy implemented in Nigeria in 2022. METHODS: The intervention targeted health care providers and adults from the general population who were users of a specific social media platform. We used published estimates from a quasi-experimental evaluation of the campaign's effectiveness compared to the status quo across 6 intervention states and 31 comparison states over a 10-month period. We estimated the cost-effectiveness of the campaign in terms of cost (2022 US dollars) per person vaccinated using a decision tree analysis and probabilistic sensitivity analysis. RESULTS: On the basis of the quasi-experimental trial, the campaign led to a crude 6.4-percentage point increase (219/692, 31.6% vs 117/463, 25.3%; P=.045) in vaccination rates and an adjusted 7.8-percentage point increase (95% CI 1.68-14.2; P=.02) controlling for age group, gender, educational level, religion, and occupation among the 20% (1933/9607) of the overall sample who were unvaccinated and in the persuadable middle. Scaled to the overall population, the campaign led to a 1.57-percentage point (95% CI 0.337-2.87; P=.02) increase in the proportion of those vaccinated against COVID-19 among those reached by the social media campaign. The social media campaign resulted in 58.3 million impressions and 1.87 million people reached for a total societal cost of US $1.15 million, or US $0.61 per person reached. This resulted in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of US $54.70 (95% uncertainty interval US $20.90-$163) per person vaccinated. CONCLUSIONS: A social media-based campaign to address COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy in 6 states in Nigeria resulted in an increase in vaccination rates. The cost-effectiveness of the campaign compared to no campaign is comparable to that of other campaigns promoting COVID-19 vaccine uptake. The cost per person vaccinated due to the social media campaign was 1% to 8% of the estimated cost per life year saved by vaccination against COVID-19 in low- and middle-income countries. Investing in social media campaigns would likely be a cost-effective approach to increase vaccine uptake and save lives.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.017
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.037
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.091

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0170.037
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.008
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.058
GPT teacher head0.409
Teacher spread0.350 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Public Health and Surveillance→Same topicVaccine Coverage and Hesitancy→French-language works237,207→