ArticlePLOS global public health2023
Use of machine learning methods to understand discussions of female genital mutilation/cutting on social media.
Article in PLOS global public health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- How do mass shootings shape the social media discourse on guns in the US Congress? Causal discovery and topic modeling.PLOS global public health · 2025Article
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
Female genital mutilation/cutting (FGM/C) describes several procedures that involve injury to the vulva or vagina for nontherapeutic reasons. Though at least 200 million women and girls living in 30 countries have undergone FGM/C, there is a paucity of studies focused on public perception of FGM/C. We used machine learning methods to characterize discussion of FGM/C on Twitter in English from 2015 to 2020. Twitter has emerged in recent years as a source for seeking and sharing health information and misinformation. We extracted text metadata from user profiles to characterize the individuals and locations involved in conversations about FGM/C. We extracted major discussion themes from posts using correlated topic modeling. Finally, we extracted features from posts and applied random forest models to predict user engagement. The volume of tweets addressing FGM/C remained fairly stable across years. Conversation was mostly concentrated among the United States and United Kingdom through 2017, but shifted to Nigeria and Kenya in 2020. Some of the discussion topics associated with FGM/C across years included Islam, International Day of Zero Tolerance, current news stories, education, activism, male circumcision, human rights, and feminism. Tweet length and follower count were consistently strong predictors of engagement. Our findings suggest that (1) discussion about FGM/C has not evolved significantly over time, (2) the majority of the conversation about FGM/C on English-speaking Twitter is advocating for an end to the practice, (3) supporters of Donald Trump make up a substantial voice in the conversation about FGM/C, and (4) understanding the nuances in how people across cultures refer to and discuss FGM/C could be important for the design of public health communication and intervention.
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.