ArticlePloS one2022
Covid-19 vaccines in Italian public opinion: Identifying key issues using Twitter and Natural Language Processing.
Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Public Discourse Toward Older Drivers in Japan Using Social Media Data From 2010 to 2022: Longitudinal Analysis.JMIR infodemiology · 2025Article
- Exploring Topics, Emotions, and Sentiments in Health Organization Posts and Public Responses on Instagram: Content Analysis.JMIR infodemiology · 2025Article
- How People in Eight European Countries Felt About the Safety, Effectiveness, and Necessity of COVID-19 Vaccination: A Cross-Sectional Survey.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- A natural language processing approach for analyzing COVID-19 vaccination response in multi-language and geo-localized tweets.Healthcare analytics (New York, N.Y.) · 2023Article
- Year 2022 in Medical Natural Language Processing: Availability of Language Models as a Step in the Democratization of NLP in the Biomedical Area.Yearbook of medical informatics · 2023Article
- Lexicon-based sentiment analysis to detect opinions and attitude towards COVID-19 vaccines on Twitter in Italy.Computers in biology and medicine · 2023Article
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 COVID-19 pandemic has changed society and people's lives. The vaccination campaign started December 27th 2020 in Italy, together with most countries in the European Union. Social media platforms can offer relevant information about how citizens have experienced and perceived the availability of vaccines and the start of the vaccination campaign. This study aims to use machine learning methods to extract sentiments and topics relating to COVID-19 vaccination from Twitter. Between February and May 2021, we collected over 71,000 tweets containing vaccines-related keywords from Italian Twitter users. To get the dominant sentiment throughout the Italian population, spatial and temporal sentiment analysis was performed using VADER, highlighting sentiment fluctuations strongly influenced by news of vaccines' side effects. Additionally, we investigated the opinions of Italians with respect to different vaccine brands. As a result, 'Oxford-AstraZeneca' vaccine was the least appreciated among people. The application of the Dynamic Latent Dirichlet Allocation (DLDA) model revealed three fundamental topics, which remained stable over time: vaccination plan info, usefulness of vaccinating and concerns about vaccines (risks, side effects and safety). To the best of our current knowledge, this one the first study on Twitter to identify opinions about COVID-19 vaccination in Italy and their progression over the first months of the vaccination campaign. Our results can help policymakers and research communities track public attitudes towards COVID-19 vaccines and help them make decisions to promote the vaccination campaign.
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.