ArticleBMC public health2023
A case study of using natural language processing to extract consumer insights from tweets in American cities for public health crises.
Article in BMC public health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Sentiment analysis in public health: a systematic review of the current state, challenges, and future directions.Frontiers in public health · 2025Pooled it
- Using social media data to improve specific urban park activities: the case of park camping.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Natural Language Processing in medicine and ophthalmology: A review for the 21st-century clinician.Asia-Pacific journal of ophthalmology (Philadelphia, Pa.)Review
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
backgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic was a "wake up" call for public health agencies. Often, these agencies are ill-prepared to communicate with target audiences clearly and effectively for community-level activations and safety operations. The obstacle is a lack of data-driven approaches to obtaining insights from local community stakeholders. Thus, this study suggests a focus on listening at local levels given the abundance of geo-marked data and presents a methodological solution to extracting consumer insights from unstructured text data for health communication.
methodsThis study demonstrates how to combine human and Natural Language Processing (NLP) machine analyses to reliably extract meaningful consumer insights from tweets about COVID and the vaccine. This case study employed Latent Dirichlet Allocation (LDA) topic modeling, Bidirectional Encoder Representations from Transformers (BERT) emotion analysis, and human textual analysis and examined 180,128 tweets scraped by Twitter Application Programming Interface's (API) keyword function from January 2020 to June 2021. The samples came from four medium-sized American cities with larger populations of people of color.
resultsThe NLP method discovered four topic trends: "COVID Vaccines," "Politics," "Mitigation Measures," and "Community/Local Issues," and emotion changes over time. The human textual analysis profiled the discussions in the selected four markets to add some depth to our understanding of the uniqueness of the different challenges experienced.
conclusionsThis study ultimately demonstrates that our method used here could efficiently reduce a large amount of community feedback (e.g., tweets, social media data) by NLP and ensure contextualization and richness with human interpretation. Recommendations on communicating vaccination are offered based on the findings: (1) the strategic objective should be empowering the public; (2) the message should have local relevance; and, (3) communication needs to be timely.
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.