Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37033473›Full record

ArticleSocial network analysis and mining2023

COVID-19 vaccine rejection causes based on Twitter people's opinions analysis using deep learning.

Wafa Alotaibi, Faye Alomary, Raouia Mokni

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Social network analysis and mining, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
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.

Wafa Alotaibi *Department of Information System, College of Computer Engineering and Sciences, Prince Sattam bin Abdulaziz University, 11942 Al-Kharj, Saudi Arabia.
Faye Alomary *Department of Information System, College of Computer Engineering and Sciences, Prince Sattam bin Abdulaziz University, 11942 Al-Kharj, Saudi Arabia.
Raouia Mokni *Department of Information System, College of Computer Engineering and Sciences, Prince Sattam bin Abdulaziz University, 11942 Al-Kharj, Saudi Arabia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

According to the World Health Organization, vaccine hesitancy was one of the ten major threats to global health in 2019, including the COVID-19 vaccine. The availability of vaccines does not always mean utilization. This is because, people have less confidence in vaccines, which resulted in vaccination hesitancy and developing global decline in vaccine intake and has caused viral disease outbreaks worldwide. Therefore, there is a need to understand people's perceptions about the COVID-19 vaccine to help the manufacturing companies of the vaccine to improve their marketing strategy based on the rejection causes. In this paper, we used multi-class Sentiment Analysis to classify people's opinions from extracted tweets about COVID-19 vaccines, using firstly different Machine Learning (ML) classifiers such as Logistic Regression (LR), Stochastic Gradient Descent, Support Vector Machine, K-Nearest Neighbors, Decision Tree (DT), Multinomial Naïve Bayes, Random Forest and Gradient Boosting and secondly various Deep Learning (DL) models such as Recurrent Neural Network (RNN), Long Short Term Memory (LSTM), Gated Recurrent Unit (GRU), RNN-LSTM and RNN-GRU. Then, we investigated the analysis of the negative tweets to identify the causes of rejection using the Latent Dirichlet Allocation (LDA) technique. Finally, we classified these negative tweets according to the rejection causes for all the vaccines using the same selected ML and DL models. The result of SA showed that DT gives the best performance with an accuracy of 92.26% and for DL models, GRU achieved 96.83%. Then, we identified five causes: Lack of safety, Side effect, Production problem, Fake news and Misinformation, and Cost. Furthermore, for the classification of the negative tweets according to the identified rejection causes, the LR achieved the best result with an accuracy of 89.97%. For DL models, the LSTM model showed the best result with an accuracy of 91.66%.

Indexed as

COVID-19 vaccinesDeep learningGRU-LSTMLatent Dirichlet allocationSentiment analysisVaccine rejection causes

Identifiers

PMID37033473
PMCPMC10069356

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.