Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36118938›Full record

ArticleSocial network analysis and mining2022

Studying topic engagement and synergy among candidates for 2020 US Elections.

Manmeet Kaur Baxi, Rajesh Sharma, Vijay Mago

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Social network analysis and mining, 2022. 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

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

3 authors.

Manmeet Kaur BaxiDepartment of Computer Science, Lakehead University, Thunder Bay, ON Canada.
Rajesh SharmaInstitute of Computer Science, University of Tartu, Tartu, Estonia.
Vijay MagoDepartment of Computer Science, Lakehead University, Thunder Bay, ON Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This article provides a comprehensive summary of how candidates running in the 2020 US Presidential Elections used Twitter to communicate with the public. More specifically, it aims to uncover elements linked to public engagement and internal cooperation (in terms of content and stance similarity among the candidates from the same political front, and with respect to the official Twitter accounts of their political parties). Our main subjects are the Presidential and Vice-Presidential candidates who contested for the 2020 US Elections from the two major political fronts-Republicans and Democrats. Their tweets were evaluated for social reach, content similarity and stance similarity on 22 topics. According to the findings, Joe Biden had the highest engagement and impact (user impact: 177.08k, normalized to 0.99), followed by Donald Trump (user impact: 164.19k, normalized to 0.92). The Democrats depicted a clearer understanding of their audience, portraying an essential link between public participation, internal cooperation and the electoral campaign. The results also demonstrate that specific topics (like

Indexed as

2020 US electionsContent similarityElectoral campaignsPublic engagementSocial media

Identifiers

PMID36118938
PMCPMC9464427

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.