BACKGROUND: In the fall of 2020, the COVID-19 infodemic began to affect public confidence in and demand for COVID-19 vaccines in the United States. While polls indicated what consumers felt regarding COVID-19 vaccines, they did not provide an understanding of why they felt that way or the social and informational influences that factored into vaccine confidence and uptake. It was essential for us to better understand how information ecosystems were affecting the confidence in and demand for COVID-19 vaccines in the United States. OBJECTIVE: The US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) established an Insights Unit within the COVID-19 Response's Vaccine Task Force in January 2021 to assist the agency in acting more swiftly to address the questions, concerns, perceptions, and misinformation that appeared to be affecting uptake of COVID-19 vaccines. We established a novel methodology to rapidly detect and report on trends in vaccine confidence and demand to guide communication efforts and improve programmatic quality in near real time. METHODS: We identified and assessed data sources for inclusion through an informal landscape analysis using a snowball method. Selected data sources provided an expansive look at the information ecosystem of the United States regarding COVID-19 vaccines. The CDC's Vaccinate with Confidence framework and the World Health Organization's behavioral and social drivers for vaccine decision-making framework were selected as guiding principles for interpreting generated insights and their impact. We used qualitative thematic analysis methods and a consensus-building approach to identify prevailing and emerging themes, assess their potential threat to vaccine confidence, and propose actions to increase confidence and demand. RESULTS: As of August 2022, we have produced and distributed 34 reports to >950 recipients within the CDC and externally. State and local health departments, nonprofit organizations, professional associations, and congressional committees have referenced and used the reports for learning about COVID-19 vaccine confidence and demand, developing communication strategies, and demonstrating how the CDC monitored and responded to misinformation. A survey of the reports' end users found that nearly 75% (40/53) of respondents found them "very" or "extremely" relevant and 52% (32/61) used the reports to inform communication strategies. In addition, our methodology underwent continuous process improvement to increase the rigor of the research process, the validity of the findings, and the usability of the reports. CONCLUSIONS: This methodology can serve as a diagnostic technique for rapidly identifying opportunities for public health interventions and prevention. As the methodology itself is adaptable, it could be leveraged and scaled for use in a variety of public health settings. Furthermore, it could be considered beyond acute public health crises to support adherence to guidance and recommendations and could be considered within routine monitoring and surveillance systems.

The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted how infodemics (defined as an overabundance of information, including misinformation and disinformation) pose a threat to public health and could hinder individuals from making informed health decisions. Although public health authorities and other stakeholders have implemented measures for managing infodemics, existing frameworks for infodemic management have been primarily focused on responding to acute health emergencies rather than integrated in routine service delivery. We review the evidence and propose a framework for infodemic management that encompasses upstream strategies and provides guidance on identifying different interventions, informed by the four levels of prevention in public health: primary, secondary, tertiary, and primordial prevention. On the basis of a narrative review of 54 documents (peer-reviewed and grey literature published from 1961 to 2023), we present examples of interventions that belong to each level of prevention. Adopting this framework requires proactive prevention and response through managing information ecosystems, beyond reacting to misinformation or disinformation.

Recognition of misinformation as a public health threat and interest in infodemics, defined as an inundation of information accompanying an epidemic or acute health event, have increased worldwide. However, scientists have no consensus on how to best define and identify misinformation and other essential characteristics of infodemics. We conducted a narrative review of secondary historical sources to examine previous infodemics in relation to four infectious diseases associated with pandemics (ie, smallpox, cholera, 1918 influenza, and HIV) and challenge the assumption that misinformation is a new phenomenon associated with increased use of social media or with the COVID-19 pandemic. On the contrary, we found that the spread of health misinformation has always been a public health challenge that has necessitated innovative solutions from medical and public health communities. We suggest expanding beyond the narrow scope of addressing misinformation to manage information ecosystems, defined as how people consume, produce, interact with, and behave around information, which include factors such as trust, stigma, and scientific literacy. Although misinformation can spread on a global scale, this holistic approach advocates for community-level interventions that improve relationships and trust between medical or public health entities and local populations.

COVID-19 vaccination decreases risk for COVID-19 illness and severe disease in children, including multisystem inflammatory syndrome (MIS-C) and death. On December 13, 2020, CDC recommended COVID-19 vaccination for persons ages ≥16 years, with expansion on May 12, 2021, to adolescents ages 12-15 years; to children ages 5-11 years on November 2, 2021; and to children ages 6 months-4 years on June 18, 2022. Following each age-specific recommendation, the U.S. government collaborated with state and local governments, vaccine manufacturers, and numerous other public and private entities, to ensure rapid, broad, and equitable COVID-19 vaccine distribution to strategic locations across the country to maximize access. However, vaccination coverage among children has been lower than among adults and lower among younger children than adolescents. As of May 10, 2023, COVID-19 primary series vaccination coverage was 61.8% among U.S. children ages 12-17 years, 32.9% among those ages 5-11 years, and 5.5% among those ages 6 months-4 years. This manuscript describes the planning and implementation of the U.S. COVID-19 pediatric vaccine program, including successes (e.g., the availability of pharmacy vaccination to extend access beyond more traditional pediatric vaccine providers) and challenges (e.g., multi-dose vaccine vials instead of single-dose vials, leading to concerns about wastage) to provide a historical record of the program and to help inform planning and implementation of future routine or pandemic-related pediatric vaccination campaigns.

In October 2020, the CDC's Vaccinate with Confidence strategy specific to COVID-19 vaccines rollout was published. Adapted from an existing vaccine confidence framework for childhood immunization, the Vaccinate with Confidence strategy for COVID-19 aimed to improve vaccine confidence, demand, and uptake of COVID-19 vaccines in the US. The objectives for COVID-19 were to 1. build trust, 2. empower healthcare personnel, and 3. engage communities and individuals. This strategy was implemented through a dedicated unit, the Vaccine Confidence and Demand (VCD) team, which collected behavioral insights; developed and disseminated toolkits and best practices in collaboration with partners; and collaborated with health departments and community-based organizations to engage communities and individuals in behavioral interventions to strengthen vaccine demand and increase COVID-19 vaccine uptake. The VCD team collected and used social and behavioral data through establishing the Insights Unit, implementing rapid community assessments, and conducting national surveys. To strengthen capacity at state and local levels, the VCD utilized "Bootcamps," a rapid training of trainers on vaccine confidence and demand, "Confidence Consults", where local leaders could request tailored advice to address local vaccine confidence challenges from subject matter experts, and utilized surge staffing to embed "Vaccine Demand Strategists" in state and local public health agencies. In addition, collaborations with Prevention Research Centers, the Institute of Museum and Library Services, and the American Psychological Association furthered work in behavioral science, community engagement, and health equity. The VCD team operationalized CDC's COVID-19 Vaccine with Confidence strategy through behavioral insights, capacity building opportunities, and collaborations to improve COVID-19 vaccine confidence, demand, and uptake in the US. The inclusion of applied behavioral science approaches were a critical component of the COVID-19 vaccination program and provides lessons learned for how behavioral science can be integrated in future emergency responses.

BACKGROUND: To respond to the need to establish infodemic management functions at the national public health institute in Germany (Robert Koch Institute, RKI), we explored and assessed available data sources, developed a social listening and integrated analysis framework, and defined when infodemic management functions should be activated during emergencies. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to establish a framework for social listening and integrated analysis for public health in the German context using international examples and technical guidance documents for infodemic management. METHODS: This study completed the following objectives: identified (potentially) available data sources for social listening and integrated analysis; assessed these data sources for their suitability and usefulness for integrated analysis in addition to an assessment of their risk using the RKI's standardized data protection requirements; developed a framework and workflow to combine social listening and integrated analysis to report back actionable infodemic insights for public health communications by the RKI and stakeholders; and defined criteria for activating integrated analysis structures in the context of a specific health event or health emergency. RESULTS: We included and classified 38% (16/42) of the identified and assessed data sources for social listening and integrated analysis at the RKI into 3 categories: social media and web-based listening data, RKI-specific data, and infodemic insights. Most data sources can be analyzed weekly to detect current trends and narratives and to inform a timely response by reporting insights that include a risk assessment and scalar judgments of different narratives and themes. CONCLUSIONS: This study identified, assessed, and prioritized a wide range of data sources for social listening and integrated analysis to report actionable infodemic insights, ensuring a valuable first step in establishing and operationalizing infodemic management at the RKI. This case study also serves as a roadmap for others. Ultimately, once operational, these activities will inform better and targeted public health communication at the RKI and beyond.

BACKGROUND: An infodemic is excess information, including false or misleading information, that spreads in digital and physical environments during a public health emergency. The COVID-19 pandemic has been accompanied by an unprecedented global infodemic that has led to confusion about the benefits of medical and public health interventions, with substantial impact on risk-taking and health-seeking behaviors, eroding trust in health authorities and compromising the effectiveness of public health responses and policies. Standardized measures are needed to quantify the harmful impacts of the infodemic in a systematic and methodologically robust manner, as well as harmonizing highly divergent approaches currently explored for this purpose. This can serve as a foundation for a systematic, evidence-based approach to monitoring, identifying, and mitigating future infodemic harms in emergency preparedness and prevention. OBJECTIVE: In this paper, we summarize the Fifth World Health Organization (WHO) Infodemic Management Conference structure, proceedings, outcomes, and proposed actions seeking to identify the interdisciplinary approaches and frameworks needed to enable the measurement of the burden of infodemics. METHODS: An iterative human-centered design (HCD) approach and concept mapping were used to facilitate focused discussions and allow for the generation of actionable outcomes and recommendations. The discussions included 86 participants representing diverse scientific disciplines and health authorities from 28 countries across all WHO regions, along with observers from civil society and global public health-implementing partners. A thematic map capturing the concepts matching the key contributing factors to the public health burden of infodemics was used throughout the conference to frame and contextualize discussions. Five key areas for immediate action were identified. RESULTS: The 5 key areas for the development of metrics to assess the burden of infodemics and associated interventions included (1) developing standardized definitions and ensuring the adoption thereof; (2) improving the map of concepts influencing the burden of infodemics; (3) conducting a review of evidence, tools, and data sources; (4) setting up a technical working group; and (5) addressing immediate priorities for postpandemic recovery and resilience building. The summary report consolidated group input toward a common vocabulary with standardized terms, concepts, study designs, measures, and tools to estimate the burden of infodemics and the effectiveness of infodemic management interventions. CONCLUSIONS: Standardizing measurement is the basis for documenting the burden of infodemics on health systems and population health during emergencies. Investment is needed into the development of practical, affordable, evidence-based, and systematic methods that are legally and ethically balanced for monitoring infodemics; generating diagnostics, infodemic insights, and recommendations; and developing interventions, action-oriented guidance, policies, support options, mechanisms, and tools for infodemic managers and emergency program managers.

Public health systems need to be able to detect and respond to infodemics (outbreaks of misinformation, disinformation, information overload, or information voids). Drawing from our experience at the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the COVID-19 State of Vaccine Confidence Insight Reporting System has been created as one of the first public health infodemic surveillance systems. Key functions of infodemic surveillance systems include monitoring the information environment by person, place, and time; identifying infodemic events with digital analytics; conducting offline community-based assessments; and generating timely routine reports. Although specific considerations of several system attributes of infodemic surveillance system must be considered, infodemic surveillance systems share several similarities with traditional public health surveillance systems. Because both information and pathogens are spread more readily in an increasingly hyperconnected world, sustainable and routine systems must be created to ensure that timely interventions can be deployed for both epidemic and infodemic response.