Enhancing vaccine communication in social Q&A: identifying readily applicable factors for answer acceptance on medical sciences stack exchange

Abstract

Introduction. Despite the efficacy of vaccines, online misinformation contributes to vaccine hesitancy. This study investigates factors influencing the acceptance of answers to vaccine-related questions on social Q&A platforms, aiming to improve online vaccine communication.

Method. We analysed 511 vaccine-related questions and 875 associated answers on the medical sciences stack exchange platform. Eleven variables were identified as potential predictors of answer acceptance, including citation practices, use of personal experiences, and recognition of asker's concerns.

Analysis. Logistic regression was employed to determine which variables significantly predict the likelihood of an answer being designated as the ‘accepted answer’ by the asker.

Results. Personal experience sharing, recognition of asker's concerns, citing data sources, and including calls-to-action emerged as significant predictors of answer acceptance. Notably, professional credentials had a modest effect, while factors such as the use of analogies or citing health authorities were not significant predictors.

Conclusions. Our findings suggest that effective vaccine communication on social Q&A platforms should balance factual information with personal narratives, address user concerns empathetically, and provide clear, actionable advice. These insights can inform strategies for health communicators and platform designers to enhance the quality and acceptance of vaccine information online.