Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24025513›Full record

ArticleJournal of biomedical informatics2013

Text classification for assisting moderators in online health communities.

Jina Huh, Meliha Yetisgen-Yildiz, Wanda Pratt

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of biomedical informatics, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

29 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Online health community experiences of sexual minority women with cancer.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2019
    Article
  14. Diabetes on Twitter: A Sentiment Analysis.Journal of diabetes science and technology · 2019
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Detecting clinically related content in online patient posts.Journal of biomedical informatics · 2017
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Jina HuhDepartment of Telecommunication, Information Studies, and Media, Michigan State University, 404 Wilson Rd, Rm 409, East Lansing, MI 48864, USA. Electronic address: jinahuh@msu.edu.
Meliha Yetisgen-Yildiz
Wanda Pratt

Funding

University of Washington Biomedical Informatics and Data Science Research Training ProgramT15LM007442 · NLM · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI JOHN H. GENNARI, Andrea L. Hartzler · 2002 to 2026
$19.6M
NLM NIH HHS 5T15LM007442-10NLM NIH HHS T15 LM007442
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesPatients increasingly visit online health communities to get help on managing health. The large scale of these online communities makes it impossible for the moderators to engage in all conversations; yet, some conversations need their expertise. Our work explores low-cost text classification methods to this new domain of determining whether a thread in an online health forum needs moderators' help.

methodsWe employed a binary classifier on WebMD's online diabetes community data. To train the classifier, we considered three feature types: (1) word unigram, (2) sentiment analysis features, and (3) thread length. We applied feature selection methods based on χ² statistics and under sampling to account for unbalanced data. We then performed a qualitative error analysis to investigate the appropriateness of the gold standard.

resultsUsing sentiment analysis features, feature selection methods, and balanced training data increased the AUC value up to 0.75 and the F1-score up to 0.54 compared to the baseline of using word unigrams with no feature selection methods on unbalanced data (0.65 AUC and 0.40 F1-score). The error analysis uncovered additional reasons for why moderators respond to patients' posts. DISCUSSION: We showed how feature selection methods and balanced training data can improve the overall classification performance. We present implications of weighing precision versus recall for assisting moderators of online health communities. Our error analysis uncovered social, legal, and ethical issues around addressing community members' needs. We also note challenges in producing a gold standard, and discuss potential solutions for addressing these challenges.

conclusionSocial media environments provide popular venues in which patients gain health-related information. Our work contributes to understanding scalable solutions for providing moderators' expertise in these large-scale, social media environments.

Indexed as

Social SupportText MessagingInternetConsumer healthHealth information seekingHuman–computer interactionOnline health communitiesText mining

Identifiers

PMID24025513
PMCPMC3874858

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.