Introduction Twitter represents a mainstream news source for the American public, offering a valuable vehicle for learning how citizens make sense of pandemic health threats like Covid-19. Masking as a risk mitigation measure became controversial in the US. The social amplification risk framework offers insight into how a risk event interacts with psychological, social, institutional, and cultural communication processes to shape Covid-19 risk perception. Methods Qualitative content analysis was conducted on 7,024 mask tweets reflecting 6,286 users between January 24 and July 7, 2020, to identify how citizens expressed Covid-19 risk perception over time. Descriptive statistics were computed for (a) proportion of tweets using hyperlinks, (b) mentions, (c) hashtags, (d) questions, and (e) location. Results Six themes emerged regarding how mask tweets amplified and attenuated Covid-19 risk: (a) severity perceptions (18.0%) steadily increased across 5 months; (b) mask effectiveness debates (10.7%) persisted; (c) who is at risk (26.4%) peaked in April and May 2020; (d) mask guidelines (15.6%) peaked April 3, 2020, with federal guidelines; (e) political legitimizing of Covid-19 risk (18.3%) steadily increased; and (f) mask behavior of others (31.6%) composed the largest discussion category and increased over time. Of tweets, 45% contained a hyperlink, 40% contained mentions, 33% contained hashtags, and 16.5% were expressed as a question. Conclusions Users ascribed many meanings to mask wearing in the social media information environment revealing that COVID-19 risk was expressed in a more expanded range than objective risk. The simultaneous amplification and attenuation of COVID-19 risk perception on social media complicates public health messaging about mask wearing.

Adolescent COVID-19 vaccination has stalled at 53% in the United States. Vaccinating adolescents remains critical to preventing the continued transmission of COVID-19, the emergence of variants, and rare but serious disease in children, and it is the best preventive measure available to return to in-person schooling. We investigated parent–adolescent COVID-19 vaccine decision-making. Between 24 February and 15 March 2021, we conducted surveys and 12 focus groups with 46 parent–adolescent dyads in Southern California. Parents and adolescents completed a survey prior to participation in a focus group discussion, which focused on exploring COVID-19 vaccine acceptance or uncertainty and was guided by the 5C vaccine hesitancy model. Parents uncertain about vaccinating adolescents expressed low vaccine confidence and high COVID-19 disease risk complacency. Parents who accepted COVID-19 vaccination for adolescents expressed high confidence in health authority vaccine recommendations, high perceived COVID-19 risk, and collective responsibility to vaccinate children. Additionally, unique pandemic-related factors of vaccine acceptance included vaccinating for emotional health, resuming social activities, and vaccine mandates. Among parents, 46% were willing to vaccinate their adolescent, 11% were not, and 43% were unsure. Among adolescents, 63% were willing to vaccinate. Despite vaccine availability, 47% of adolescents remain unvaccinated against COVID-19. Factors associated with vaccine uncertainty and acceptability inform health care practitioner, school, community, and public health messaging to reach parents and adolescents.

Human papilloma virus (HPV) is the most common sexually transmitted infection in the United States. Disease-associated strains of HPV can cause genital warts and six cancer types. HPV-associated cervical cancer disproportionately impacts medically underserved women including Black and Latina women with respect to incidence, prevalence, and mortality rates. Although safe and effective vaccines are available, HPV vaccination rates remain low among low-income individuals and women of color. The current study examined individual and structural motivators and barriers to HPV vaccination among medically underserved women utilizing a Planned Parenthood health center in Southeast Pennsylvania. Guided by narrative engagement theory (NET), qualitative interviews (N = 24) were used to elicit HPV vaccine decision stories from both vaccinated and unvaccinated women. Using a phronetic iterative data analysis approach, we identified three motivators to vaccinate against HPV: (1) receiving an explicit vaccine recommendation from a healthcare provider (a structural determinant), (2) feeling empowered to take control of one’s health (an individual determinant), and (3) knowing someone infected with HPV (an individual determinant). Among unvaccinated participants, barriers to HPV vaccination included: (1) not receiving an explicit vaccine recommendation from a healthcare provider (a structural determinant), (2) low perceived risk for acquiring HPV or that HPV is not severe (an individual determinant), and (3) lack of maternal support to vaccinate (a structural determinant). Healthcare providers are optimally positioned to fill the gap in prior missed vaccine opportunities and empower women by recommending HPV vaccination.

No abstract