Skip to main content
Elsevier - PMC COVID-19 Collection logoLink to Elsevier - PMC COVID-19 Collection
. 2021 Sep 17;116(3):e298. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2021.07.802

OVERALL POSITIVE POSTS AFTER INTRODUCTION OF COVID-19 VACCINE ON FERTILITY-RELATED SOCIAL MEDIA

Nicole D Yoder 1, Jillian Pecoriello 1, Meghan B Smith 2, Jennifer K Blakemore 3
PMCID: PMC9436466

Objective

Social media is a popular way to disseminate new information and opinions, perhaps furthered by the COVID-19 pandemic and quarantine. Our objective was to analyze information and sentiments posted regarding the COVID-19 vaccine (VAX) on fertility-related social media.

Materials and Methods

The search function of Instagram (IG) and Twitter (TW) was used to identify the first fifty accounts with the following terms: fertility doctor, fertility, OBGYN, infertility, TTC, and IVF. Accounts not in English, private, no posts in >1 year, or content unrelated to search terms were excluded. Accounts were evaluated for author type and categorized as physician (PH), individual (ID), or fertility center/fertility-related organization (FCO). Account demographics including number of followers and prior baseline post activity (number of likes/number of followers) were recorded. The VAX was approved on 12/11/2020 and posts dated 12/1/2020 - 2/28/2021 were reviewed. Posts mentioning the VAX were analyzed for content: sentiment (positive, negative, or neutral), mention of research studies (RS), national guidelines (NG), personal experience (PE), side effects (SE), reproductive related (RR) content and post activity. Statistical analysis included Chi-Squared and Fisher’s exact tests, with significance set to <0.05 (*).

Results

536 accounts were identified and 276 were included (133 IG and 143 TW). There were 104 PH accounts (45 IG, 59 TW), 91 ID accounts (62 IG, 29 TW), and 81 FCO accounts (26 IG, 55 TW). PH accounts were most associated with mention of COVID (83.7%*) and VAX (68.3%*), followed by FCO (37% COVID*, 30.9% VAX*), and ID (8.8% COVID*, 6.6% VAX*). PH was most associated with >1 VAX posts compared to FCO or ID (51.0% v 11.1% v 1.0%*). Sentiments toward the VAX were largely positive for all groups (PH 90.3%, ID 71.4%, FCO 70%), or neutral (PH 9.7%, ID 28.6%, FCO 30%), with no negative posts identified. Trends in mentions and sentiments were similar on both IG and TW platforms. PH cited NG (24.6%*) and RS (17.5%) more than ID and FCO, with most cited guidelines from ACOG, ASRM, and SMFM. ID posts were mostly PE (87.5%*) and SE (57.1%*). RR posts were most associated with FCO accounts (80%*) which included pregnancy, infertility, and breastfeeding. Sub-group analysis of IG accounts showed an increase in activity on VAX posts compared to baseline by likes (PH 4.86% v 3.76%, ID 7.5% v 6.37%, FCO 2.49% v 0.52%) as well as comments (PH 0.35% v 0.28%, ID 0.90% v 0.69%, FCO 0.10% v 0.02%).

Conclusions

Overall, the majority of posts expressed positive sentiments toward the VAX with no negative posts identified. PH were most likely to post about COVID-19, the VAX and guidelines. Few ID accounts posted but when present were about personal experiences or side effects and remained positive.

Impact Statement

There is an active conversation regarding COVID-19 and VAX information on social media, with the majority of posts expressing positive sentiment. Physicians play a large role in circulating information regarding the VAX on social media platforms, and can be influential in discussions of VAX guidelines and dispelling fertility myths.

P-456 6:30 AM Wednesday, October 20, 2021

Footnotes

SUPPORT: None


Articles from Fertility and Sterility are provided here courtesy of Elsevier

RESOURCES