ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2022
The Identification and Analysis of the Centers of Geographical Public Opinions in Flood Disasters Based on Improved Naïve Bayes Network.
Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Risk identification and assessment of Internet public opinion on public emergencies based on Bayesian network and association rule mining.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The increasing frequency of floods and the lack of protective measures have the potential to cause severe damage. Working from the perspective of network public opinion is an effective way to understand flood disasters. However, the existing research tends to focus on a single perspective, such as the characteristics of the text, algorithm optimization, or spatial location recognition, while scholars have paid much less attention to the impact of social-psychological differences in space on network public opinion. This research is based on the following hypothesis: When public opinions break out, the differences of network public opinions in geography will form spatially different centers of geographical public opinions in flood disasters (CGeoPOFDs). These centers represent the cities that receive the most attention from network public opinion. Based on this hypothesis, this study proposes a new way of identifying and analyzing CGeoPOFDs. First, two optimization strategies were applied to enhance a naïve Bayes network: syntactic parsing, which was used to optimize the selection of feature word vectors, and ensemble learning, which enabled multi-classifier fusion optimization. Social media data were classified through the improved algorithm, and then, various methods (hotspot analysis, geographic mapping, and sentiment analysis) were used to identify CGeoPOFDs. Finally, analysis was performed in terms of spatiotemporal, virtual, and real dimensions. In addition, microblog social data and real disaster data were used to arrive at empirical results. According to the study findings, the identified CGeoPOFDs offered traditional characteristics of network public opinion while also featuring unique spatiotemporal characteristics. Over time, CGeoPOFDs demonstrated spatial aggregation and bias diffusion and an overall positive emotional tendency.
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.