ArticleFrontiers in big data2019
Use of Machine Learning to Detect Wildlife Product Promotion and Sales on Twitter.
Article in Frontiers in big data, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 45 citations in OpenAlex.
- AI-driven technological breakthroughs and practical pathways for biodiversity conservation and ecological management.iScience · 2026Review
- A customized image editing framework for diverse prohibited and restricted products in illegal online transactions.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Impact of COVID-19 on HIV Prevention Access: A Multi-platform Social Media Infodemiology Study.AIDS and behavior · 2023Article
- Is social media the new wet market? Social media platforms facilitate the online sale of bushmeat in West Africa.One health (Amsterdam, Netherlands) · 2023Article
- Ageism on Twitter during the COVID-19 pandemic.The Journal of social issues · 2022Article
- Article
- Big Data, Natural Language Processing, and Deep Learning to Detect and Characterize Illicit COVID-19 Product Sales: Infoveillance Study on Twitter and Instagram.JMIR public health and surveillance · 2020Article
- Unsupervised Machine Learning to Detect and Characterize Barriers to Pre-exposure Prophylaxis Therapy: Multiplatform Social Media Study.JMIR infodemiologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Social media is an important channel for communication, information dissemination, and social interaction, but also provides opportunities to illicitly sell goods online, including the trade of wildlife products. In this study, we use the Twitter public application programming interface (API) to access Twitter messages in order to detect and classify suspicious wildlife trafficking and sale using an unsupervised machine learning topic model combined with keyword filtering and manual annotation. We choose two prohibited wildlife animals and related products: elephant ivory and pangolin, and collected tweets containing keywords and known code words related to these species. In total, we collected 138,357 tweets filtered for these keywords over a 14-day period and were able to identify 53 tweets from 38 unique users that we suspect promoted the sale of Ivory products, though no pangolin related promoted post were detected in this study. Study results show that machine learning combined with supplement analysis approaches such as those utilized in this study have the potential to detect illegal content without the use of an existing training data set. If developed further, these approaches can help technology companies, conservation groups, and law enforcement officials to expedite the process of identifying illegal online sales and stem supply for the billion-dollar criminal industry of online wildlife trafficking.
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.