Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34188346›Full record

ArticleArtificial intelligence review2021

Over a decade of social opinion mining: a systematic review.

Keith Cortis, Brian Davis

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Artificial intelligence review, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing 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

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Enhancing Psychological Well-Being Assessment Through Data Mining: A Case Study from Thailand.European journal of investigation in health, psychology and education · 2025
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Attention, sentiments and emotions towards emerging climate technologies on Twitter.Global environmental change : human and policy dimensions · 2023
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. 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

2 authors.

Keith CortisADAPT Centre, Dublin City University, Dublin, Ireland.ORCID 0000-0002-9748-0340
Brian DavisADAPT Centre, Dublin City University, Dublin, Ireland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Social media popularity and importance is on the increase due to people using it for various types of social interaction across multiple channels. This systematic review focuses on the evolving research area of Social Opinion Mining, tasked with the identification of multiple opinion dimensions, such as subjectivity, sentiment polarity, emotion, affect, sarcasm and irony, from user-generated content represented across multiple social media platforms and in various media formats, like text, image, video and audio. Through Social Opinion Mining, natural language can be understood in terms of the different opinion dimensions, as expressed by humans. This contributes towards the evolution of Artificial Intelligence which in turn helps the advancement of several real-world use cases, such as customer service and decision making. A thorough systematic review was carried out on Social Opinion Mining research which totals 485 published studies and spans a period of twelve years between 2007 and 2018. The in-depth analysis focuses on the social media platforms, techniques, social datasets, language, modality, tools and technologies, and other aspects derived. Social Opinion Mining can be utilised in many application areas, ranging from marketing, advertising and sales for product/service management, and in multiple domains and industries, such as politics, technology, finance, healthcare, sports and government. The latest developments in Social Opinion Mining beyond 2018 are also presented together with future research directions, with the aim of leaving a wider academic and societal impact in several real-world applications.

Indexed as

Artificial intelligenceEmotion analysisIrony detectionMicroblogsNatural language processingOpinion miningSarcasm detectionSentiment analysisSocial dataSocial data analysisSocial mediaSocial networksSocial opinion miningSubjectivity analysisSurveySystematic review

Identifiers

PMID34188346
PMCPMC8227369

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.