Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31201194›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2019

Understanding public opinion to the introduction of minimum unit pricing in Scotland: a qualitative study using Twitter.

Laurence Astill Wright, Su Golder, Adam Balkham, J McCambridge

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
–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

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Analysing Credibility of UK Social Media Influencers' Weight-Management Blogs: A Pilot Study.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2020
    Article
  10. Article
  11. 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

4 authors.

Laurence Astill WrightDepartment of Health Sciences, University of York, York, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-8324-1229
Su GolderDepartment of Health Sciences, University of York, York, UK.
Adam BalkhamDepartment of Health Sciences, University of York, York, UK.
J McCambridgeDepartment of Health Sciences, University of York, York, UK.

Funding

Wellcome TrustWellcome Trust 200321/Z/15/Z
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesOn 1 May 2018 minimum unit pricing (MUP) of alcohol was introduced in Scotland. This study used Twitter posts to quantify sentiment expressed online during the introduction of MUP, conducted a thematic analysis of these perceptions and analysed which Twitter users were associated with which particular sentiments. DESIGN AND

settingThis qualitative social media analysis captured all tweets relating to MUP during the 2 weeks after the introduction of the policy. These tweets were assessed using a mixture of human and machine coding for relevance, sentiment and source. A thematic analysis was conducted.

participants74 639 tweets were collected over 14 days. Of these 53 574 were relevant to MUP.

resultsStudy findings demonstrate that opinion on the introduction of MUP in Scotland was somewhat divided, as far as is discernible on Twitter, with a slightly higher proportion of positive posts (35%) than negative posts (28%), with positive sentiment stronger in Scotland itself. Furthermore, 55% of positive tweets/retweets were originally made by health or alcohol policy-related individuals or organisations. Thematic analysis of tweets showed some evidence of misunderstanding around policy issues.

conclusionsIt is possible to appreciate the divided nature of public opinion on the introduction of MUP in Scotland using Twitter, the nature of the sentiment around it and the key actors involved. It will be possible to later study how this changes when the policy becomes more established.

Indexed as

Public OpinionSocial MediaAlcoholic BeveragesCosts and Cost AnalysisHumansQualitative ResearchScotlandalcoholinternetpubic policypublic opinionscotlandsocial media

Identifiers

PMID31201194
PMCPMC6576115

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.