ArticleJMIR public health and surveillance2021
"Thought I'd Share First" and Other Conspiracy Theory Tweets from the COVID-19 Infodemic: Exploratory Study.
Article in JMIR public health and surveillance, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 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
26 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Machine Learning Used in Communicable Disease Control: A Scoping Review.Public health reviews · 2026Pooled it
- Multi-perspectives systematic review on the applications of sentiment analysis for vaccine hesitancy.Computers in biology and medicine · 2021Pooled it
- Article
- Interdisciplinary Approach to Identify and Characterize COVID-19 Misinformation on Twitter: Mixed Methods Study.JMIR formative research · 2023Article
- Automatic detection of health misinformation: a systematic review.Journal of ambient intelligence and humanized computing · 2023Article
- Article
- Belief in COVID-19 Conspiracy Theories, Level of Trust in Government Information, and Willingness to Take COVID-19 Vaccines Among Health Care Workers in Nigeria: Survey Study.JMIR formative research · 2023Article
- Article
- Classification of Covid-19 misinformation on social media based on neuro-fuzzy and neural network: A systematic review.Neural computing & applications · 2023Article
- Narcissistic susceptibility to conspiracy beliefs exaggerated by education, reduced by cognitive reflection.Frontiers in psychology · 2023Article
- Cross-platform spread: vaccine-related content, sources, and conspiracy theories in YouTube videos shared in early Twitter COVID-19 conversations.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2022Article
- Article
- Public Opinion Manipulation on Social Media: Social Network Analysis of Twitter Bots during the COVID-19 Pandemic.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- The vaccine hesitancy continuum among hesitant adopters of the COVID-19 vaccine.Clinical and translational science · 2022Article
- Social media and attitudes towards a COVID-19 vaccination: A systematic review of the literature.EClinicalMedicine · 2022Article
- Online News Coverage of COVID-19 Long Haul Symptoms.Journal of community health · 2022Article
- Perspectives on Mass Media and Governmental Measures during the 2020 COVID-19 Pandemic in a Romanian Sample of Healthcare Practitioners.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Assessing the validity of digital health literacy instrument for secondary school students in Ghana: The polychoric factor analytic approach.Frontiers in digital health · 2022Article
- The role of social media during the COVID-19 pandemic: Salvaging its 'power' for positive social behaviour change in Africa.Health promotion perspectives · 2022Review
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe COVID-19 outbreak has left many people isolated within their homes; these people are turning to social media for news and social connection, which leaves them vulnerable to believing and sharing misinformation. Health-related misinformation threatens adherence to public health messaging, and monitoring its spread on social media is critical to understanding the evolution of ideas that have potentially negative public health impacts.
objectiveThe aim of this study is to use Twitter data to explore methods to characterize and classify four COVID-19 conspiracy theories and to provide context for each of these conspiracy theories through the first 5 months of the pandemic.
methodsWe began with a corpus of COVID-19 tweets (approximately 120 million) spanning late January to early May 2020. We first filtered tweets using regular expressions (n=1.8 million) and used random forest classification models to identify tweets related to four conspiracy theories. Our classified data sets were then used in downstream sentiment analysis and dynamic topic modeling to characterize the linguistic features of COVID-19 conspiracy theories as they evolve over time.
resultsAnalysis using model-labeled data was beneficial for increasing the proportion of data matching misinformation indicators. Random forest classifier metrics varied across the four conspiracy theories considered (F1 scores between 0.347 and 0.857); this performance increased as the given conspiracy theory was more narrowly defined. We showed that misinformation tweets demonstrate more negative sentiment when compared to nonmisinformation tweets and that theories evolve over time, incorporating details from unrelated conspiracy theories as well as real-world events.
conclusionsAlthough we focus here on health-related misinformation, this combination of approaches is not specific to public health and is valuable for characterizing misinformation in general, which is an important first step in creating targeted messaging to counteract its spread. Initial messaging should aim to preempt generalized misinformation before it becomes widespread, while later messaging will need to target evolving conspiracy theories and the new facets of each as they become incorporated.
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.