ArticleJMIR public health and surveillance2017
Identifying Sentiment of Hookah-Related Posts on Twitter.
Article in JMIR public health and surveillance, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
25 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 38 citations in OpenAlex.
- #TurntTrending: a systematic review of substance use portrayals on social media platforms.Addiction (Abingdon, England) · 2023Pooled it
- Prevalence of Health Misinformation on Social Media: Systematic Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2021Pooled it
- AI for Tobacco Control: Identifying Tobacco-Promoting Social Media Content Using Large Language Models.Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco · 2025Article
- Spanish-Language Tobacco-Related Posts on Twitter: Content Analysis.Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco · 2024Article
- Oral Nicotine Gum Discussions on Twitter: Content Analysis.Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco · 2024Article
- Twitter Sentiment About the US Federal Tobacco 21 Law: Mixed Methods Analysis.JMIR formative research · 2023Article
- Potential Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Public Perception of Water Pipes on Reddit: Observational Study.JMIR infodemiology · 2023Article
- Ice Flavor-Related Discussions on Twitter: Content Analysis.Journal of medical Internet research · 2022Article
- The Longitudinal Impact of Seeing and Posting Tobacco-related Social Media on Tobacco Use Behaviors Among Youth (Aged 12-17): Findings From the 2014-2016 Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health (PATH) Study.Tobacco use insights · 2022Article
- Social media analytics in nutrition research: a rapid review of current usage in investigation of dietary behaviours.Public health nutrition · 2021Review
- General Audience Engagement With Antismoking Public Health Messages Across Multiple Social Media Sites: Comparative Analysis.JMIR public health and surveillance · 2021Article
- Public Response to a Social Media Tobacco Prevention Campaign: Content Analysis.JMIR public health and surveillance · 2020Article
- Social Media as a Research Tool (SMaaRT) for Risky Behavior Analytics: Methodological Review.JMIR public health and surveillance · 2020Review
- Infodemiology and Infoveillance: Scoping Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2020Article
- A Software Tool Aimed at Automating the Generation, Distribution, and Assessment of Social Media Messages for Health Promotion and Education Research.JMIR public health and surveillance · 2019Article
- Combining Real-Time Ratings With Qualitative Interviews to Develop a Smoking Cessation Text Messaging Program for Primary Care Patients.JMIR mHealth and uHealth · 2019Article
- How Do Waterpipe Smoking Establishments Attract Smokers? Implications for Policy.Substance use & misuse · 2019Article
- Automated Identification of Hookahs (Waterpipes) on Instagram: An Application in Feature Extraction Using Convolutional Neural Network and Support Vector Machine Classification.Journal of medical Internet research · 2018Article
- Hookah-Related Posts to Twitter From 2017 to 2018: Thematic Analysis.Journal of medical Internet research · 2018Article
- Talking about tobacco on Twitter is associated with tobacco product use.Preventive medicine · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe increasing popularity of hookah (or waterpipe) use in the United States and elsewhere has consequences for public health because it has similar health risks to that of combustible cigarettes. While hookah use rapidly increases in popularity, social media data (Twitter, Instagram) can be used to capture and describe the social and environmental contexts in which individuals use, perceive, discuss, and are marketed this tobacco product. These data may allow people to organically report on their sentiment toward tobacco products like hookah unprimed by a researcher, without instrument bias, and at low costs.
objectiveThis study describes the sentiment of hookah-related posts on Twitter and describes the importance of debiasing Twitter data when attempting to understand attitudes.
methodsHookah-related posts on Twitter (N=986,320) were collected from March 24, 2015, to December 2, 2016. Machine learning models were used to describe sentiment on 20 different emotions and to debias the data so that Twitter posts reflected sentiment of legitimate human users and not of social bots or marketing-oriented accounts that would possibly provide overly positive or overly negative sentiment of hookah.
resultsFrom the analytical sample, 352,116 tweets (59.50%) were classified as positive while 177,537 (30.00%) were classified as negative, and 62,139 (10.50%) neutral. Among all positive tweets, 218,312 (62.00%) were classified as highly positive emotions (eg, active, alert, excited, elated, happy, and pleasant), while 133,804 (38.00%) positive tweets were classified as passive positive emotions (eg, contented, serene, calm, relaxed, and subdued). Among all negative tweets, 95,870 (54.00%) were classified as subdued negative emotions (eg, sad, unhappy, depressed, and bored) while the remaining 81,667 (46.00%) negative tweets were classified as highly negative emotions (eg, tense, nervous, stressed, upset, and unpleasant). Sentiment changed drastically when comparing a corpus of tweets with social bots to one without. For example, the probability of any one tweet reflecting joy was 61.30% from the debiased (or bot free) corpus of tweets. In contrast, the probability of any one tweet reflecting joy was 16.40% from the biased corpus.
conclusionsSocial media data provide researchers the ability to understand public sentiment and attitudes by listening to what people are saying in their own words. Tobacco control programmers in charge of risk communication may consider targeting individuals posting positive messages about hookah on Twitter or designing messages that amplify the negative sentiments. Posts on Twitter communicating positive sentiment toward hookah could add to the normalization of hookah use and is an area of future research. Findings from this study demonstrated the importance of debiasing data when attempting to understand attitudes from Twitter data.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.