ArticleJournal of environmental and public health2022
Analysis of News Dissemination Path and Impact of Big Data Technology in Public Health Emergencies.
Article in Journal of environmental and public health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It has been retracted, and should not be counted. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Retracted: Analysis of News Dissemination Path and Impact of Big Data Technology in Public Health Emergencies.Journal of environmental and public health · 2023Article
- Research on emergency management of global public health emergencies driven by digital technology: A bibliometric analysis.Frontiers in public health · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
- Retraction · 2023-10-18Concerns/Issues about Data · Concerns/Issues about Results and/or Conclusions · Concerns/Issues about Referencing/Attributions · Concerns/Issues about Peer Review · Investigation by Journal/Publisher · Investigation by Third Party · Paper Mill · Computer-Aided Content or Computer-Generated Content · Unreliable Results and/or Conclusions ·
- Retracted
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Throughout the past public health early warning work, there is still a lack of early warning. Therefore, starting from the reform of the public health early warning mechanism, this paper sorts out the design and development of our country's public health early warning mechanism and its legal framework and further analyzes the unresolved problems that exist in early warning work. At this stage, our country's public health departments have put forward targeted suggestions for improving the early warning mechanism for emergencies and stabilizing public order. In this context, the following data are obtained: (1) The timeliness under the big data model is 73.81%, the prudence is 84.25%, the sustainability is 96.28%; the timeliness under the data mining model is 61.98%, prudence is 77.58%, sustainability is 83.24%; and the timeliness of the intelligent computing model is 53.44%, prudence is 65.58%, and sustainability is 96.28%. (2) During public health emergencies, the path of news dissemination includes 54 people for radio and television communication, accounting for 13%; 98 people for digital communication, accounting for 24%; 73 people for digital TV communication, accounting for 19%; the number of public relations companies was 63 people, accounting for 16%; the number of people who reprinted and spread was 52 people, accounting for 12%; the number of people who searched and spread was 73 people, accounting for 19%; the number of people who spread mobile phone messages was 32 people, accounting for 9%. At this stage, according to the characteristics of public health emergencies, the problems existing in the early warning work are analyzed, and specific suggestions for improving the early warning mechanism of public health emergencies in our country are put forward to stabilize the "public order." Research in this area is ongoing.
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.