ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2020
Contextualising the 2019 E-Cigarette Health Scare: Insights from Twitter.
Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.
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
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- Impact of a New Gynecologic Oncology Hashtag During Virtual-Only ASCO Annual Meetings: An X (Twitter) Social Network Analysis.JMIR medical education · 2024Article
- Twitter's Role in Combating the Magnetic Vaccine Conspiracy Theory: Social Network Analysis of Tweets.Journal of medical Internet research · 2023Article
- Analyzing Discussions Around Rural Health on Twitter During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Social Network Analysis of Twitter Data.JMIR infodemiology · 2023Article
- The #VaccinesWork Hashtag on Twitter in the Context of the COVID-19 Pandemic: Network Analysis.JMIR public health and surveillance · 2022Article
- A Social Network Analysis of Twitter Data Related to Blood Clots and Vaccines.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- #radonc: Growth of the global radiation oncology Twitter network.Clinical and translational radiation oncology · 2021Article
- Using a mixed methods approach to identify public perception of vaping risks and overall health outcomes on Twitter during the 2019 EVALI outbreak.International journal of medical informatics · 2021Article
- Correlates of Lifetime and Past Month Vape Use in a Sample of Canadian University Students.Substance abuse : research and treatment · 2021Article
- A Social Network Analysis of Tweets Related to Masks during the COVID-19 Pandemic.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2020Article
- COVID-19 and the "Film Your Hospital" Conspiracy Theory: Social Network Analysis of Twitter Data.Journal of medical Internet research · 2020Article
- Exploring the Social Media on the Communication Professionals in Public Health. Spanish Official Medical Colleges Case Study.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2020Article
- COVID-19 and the 5G Conspiracy Theory: Social Network Analysis of Twitter Data.Journal of medical Internet research · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A health scare can be described as a campaign that attempts to alert the public of a particular substance or activity that can lead to a negative effect on health. A recent health scare to emerge relates to the health hazards associated with the use of e-cigarettes, which has caused widespread debate, which peaked towards the end of 2019. Health scares need to be studied in the context in which they occur, and one method of studying them is through social media. This paper identifies two key topics of discussion on Twitter, which consisted of pro-vaping and anti-vaping views. The paper then identifies influential users, frequently occurring words, hashtags, and websites related to this time period in order to gain insight into e-cigarette perceptions. The paper then reviews current scientific evidence and develops a flowchart for the general public, which can be used to for public reassurance and guidance.
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.