ArticleThe European physical journal. Special topics2022
Fake or real news about COVID-19? Pretrained transformer model to detect potential misleading news.
Article in The European physical journal. Special topics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- When Infodemic Meets Epidemic: Systematic Literature Review.JMIR public health and surveillance · 2025Pooled it
- Article
- Mapping automatic social media information disorder. The role of bots and AI in spreading misleading information in society.PloS one · 2024Article
- Users' Reactions to Announced Vaccines Against COVID-19 Before Marketing in France: Analysis of Twitter Posts.Journal of medical Internet research · 2023Article
- Agenda-Setting for COVID-19: A Study of Large-Scale Economic News Coverage Using Natural Language Processing.International journal of data science and analytics · 2023Article
- COVID-19: respiratory disease diagnosis with regularized deep convolutional neural network using human respiratory sounds.The European physical journal. Special topics · 2022Article
- Utilizing deep learning models for ternary classification in COVID-19 infodemic detection.Digital healthArticle
- Health Misinformation Detection: Approaches, Challenges and Opportunities.Inquiry : a journal of medical care organization, provision and financingReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The World Health Organization declared the novel coronavirus disease 2019 a pandemic on March 11, 2020. Along with the coronavirus pandemic, a new crisis has emerged, characterized by widespread fear and panic caused by a lack of information or, in some cases, outright fake messages. In these circumstances, Twitter is one of the most eminent and trusted social media platforms. Fake tweets, on the other hand, are challenging to detect and differentiate. The primary goal of this paper is to educate society about the importance of accurate information and prevent the spread of fake information. This paper has investigated COVID-19 fake data from various social media platforms such as Twitter, Facebook, and Instagram. The objective of this paper is to categorize given tweets as either fake or real news. The authors have tested various deep learning models on the COVID-19 fake dataset. Finally, the CT-BERT and RoBERTa deep learning models outperformed other deep learning models like BERT, BERTweet, AlBERT, and DistlBERT. The proposed ensemble deep learning architecture outperformed CT-BERT and RoBERTa on the COVID-19 fake news dataset using the multiplicative fusion technique. The proposed model's performance in this technique was determined by the multiplicative product of the final predictive values of CT-BERT and RoBERTa. This technique overcomes the disadvantage of these CT-BERT and RoBERTa models' incorrect predictive nature. The proposed architecture outperforms both well-known ML and DL models, with 98.88% accuracy and a 98.93% F1-score.
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.