Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34341767›Full record

ArticleArXiv2021

A Biomedically oriented automatically annotated Twitter COVID-19 Dataset.

Luis Alberto Robles Hernandez, Tiffany J Callahan, Juan M Banda

Abstract readPreprint
In one paragraph

Article in ArXiv, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Luis Alberto Robles HernandezDepartment of Computer Science, Georgia State University, Atlanta, Georgia, 30303 USA.
Tiffany J CallahanComputational Bioscience Program, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora, CO, 80045 USA.
Juan M BandaDepartment of Computer Science, Georgia State University, Atlanta, Georgia, 30303 USA.

Funding

Stanford Medicine Center for Longevity and Healthy Aging Research Education CoreP30AG059307 · NIA · STANFORD UNIVERSITY · PI PERIYAKOIL, VYJEYANTHI S, YESAVAGE, JEROME A · 2018 to 2025
$4.9M
NIA NIH HHS P30 AG059307
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The use of social media data, like Twitter, for biomedical research has been gradually increasing over the years. With the COVID-19 pandemic, researchers have turned to more nontraditional sources of clinical data to characterize the disease in near real-time, study the societal implications of interventions, as well as the sequelae that recovered COVID-19 cases present (Long-COVID). However, manually curated social media datasets are difficult to come by due to the expensive costs of manual annotation and the efforts needed to identify the correct texts. When datasets are available, they are usually very small and their annotations do not generalize well over time or to larger sets of documents. As part of the 2021 Biomedical Linked Annotation Hackathon, we release our dataset of over 120 million automatically annotated tweets for biomedical research purposes. Incorporating best practices, we identify tweets with potentially high clinical relevance. We evaluated our work by comparing several SpaCy-based annotation frameworks against a manually annotated gold-standard dataset. Selecting the best method to use for automatic annotation, we then annotated 120 million tweets and released them publicly for future downstream usage within the biomedical domain.

Identifiers

PMID34341767
PMCPMC8328063

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.