Campaign types and location.

IntroductionDonation-based crowdfunding was heavily used during the COVID-19 pandemic. While most of these campaigns were uncontroversial, others spread misinformation or undermined public health. In response, mainstream crowdfunding platforms like GoFundMe restricted what campaigns they would host. This led some campaigns to shift to lesser-known and less restrictive crowdfunding platforms. While research on health-related misinformation on mainstream crowdfunding platforms is increasing, less is known about crowdfunding on less restrictive platforms like GiveSendGo. The aim of this study is to review vaccine-related crowdfunding campaigns on the GiveSendGo platform to better understand: 1) how vaccines are portrayed on GiveSendGo; and 2) how successful these campaigns have been at attracting financial support.MethodsWe searched the GiveSendGo crowdfunding platform for campaigns including “vaccine” or “vaccination”. This process yielded 907 unique results which were then scraped for their campaign text and fundraising data. The authors reviewed these campaigns for fundraisers whose aims related to vaccines for humans and assigned campaigns as being for 1) Accessing vaccines; 2) creating Spaces for the unvaccinated; 3) helping Unvaccinated Individuals); 4) Advocacy about vaccines; 5) supporting Anti-Mandate actions; and 6) responding to Vaccine Injuries.FindingsWe identified 765 crowdfunding campaigns that raised $6,814,817 and requested $838,578,249. Anti-Mandate campaigns were most common, followed by Unvaccinated Individuals, Vaccine Injuries, Advocacy, Access, and Spaces. Only Access campaigns took a positive or neutral view toward vaccines. Themes of freedom and religion cut across campaign types with campaigns critical of vaccines invoking bodily autonomy and religious freedom as justifying their fundraisers.DiscussionVery few of these fundraisers met their goals. With the exception of Access campaigns, they frequently contained highly polarizing language advocating against public health mandates, misinformation about vaccine safety, and language from bioethics and reproductive choice advocates. Restrictions on vaccine-related campaigns on the GoFundMe platform likely drove campaign creation on GiveSendGo.

引言
新冠疫情（COVID-19 pandemic）期间，基于捐赠的众筹得到了广泛应用。尽管此类众筹项目大多并无争议，但部分项目却散布虚假信息，损害了公共卫生利益。对此，GoFundMe等主流众筹平台对其所承接的众筹项目施加了限制。这使得部分众筹项目转向了知名度较低、限制更少的众筹平台。尽管针对主流众筹平台上健康相关虚假信息的研究日益增多，但对于GiveSendGo这类限制较少的平台上的众筹活动，学界的了解仍较为匮乏。本研究旨在梳理GiveSendGo平台上与疫苗相关的众筹项目，以更深入地明晰两个问题：1）GiveSendGo平台上对疫苗的呈现方式；2）此类项目在募集资金方面的成效如何。

研究方法
我们在GiveSendGo众筹平台上检索包含"vaccine"（疫苗）或"vaccination"（疫苗接种）的众筹项目。此次检索共得到907个独立项目，随后我们抓取了这些项目的众筹文案与筹款数据。研究人员对这些项目进行筛选，选取目标与人类疫苗相关的众筹活动，并将其划分为以下6类：1）获取疫苗；2）为未接种人群创建活动空间；3）帮助未接种个体；4）疫苗相关宣传倡导；5）支持反强制令行动；6）应对疫苗接种损伤。

研究结果
本研究共筛选出765个众筹项目，累计募集资金6,814,817美元，累计筹款目标为838,578,249美元。反强制令类项目最为常见，其次依次为未接种个体帮扶类、疫苗接种损伤应对类、疫苗相关宣传倡导类、疫苗获取类以及未接种人群空间创建类。仅疫苗获取类项目对疫苗持积极或中立态度。各类项目均贯穿了自由与宗教相关的主题，其中批评疫苗的项目以身体自主权与宗教自由作为其筹款活动的正当性依据。

讨论
此类筹款项目中，极少有能够达成筹款目标的。除疫苗获取类项目外，其余各类项目均频繁使用极具分裂性的言论，包括反对公共卫生强制令的主张、疫苗安全性相关的虚假信息，以及援引生命伦理学与生育选择权倡导者的表述。GoFundMe平台对疫苗相关众筹项目的限制，很可能是促使项目转向GiveSendGo平台的原因。