Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39078813›Full record

ArticlePLOS digital health2024

Evaluating automatic annotation of lexicon-based models for stance detection of M-pox tweets from May 1st to Sep 5th, 2022.

Nicholas Perikli, Srimoy Bhattacharya, Blessing Ogbuokiri, Zahra Movahedi Nia, Benjamin Lieberman, Nidhi Tripathi, Salah-Eddine Dahbi, Finn Stevenson, Nicola Bragazzi, Jude Kong and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLOS digital health, 2024. 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

11 authors.

Nicholas PerikliSchool of Physics and Institute for Collider Particle Physics, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8963-4290
Srimoy BhattacharyaSchool of Physics and Institute for Collider Particle Physics, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa.
Blessing OgbuokiriAfrica-Canada Artificial Intelligence and Data Innovation Consortium (ACADIC), York University, Toronto, Canada.
Zahra Movahedi NiaAfrica-Canada Artificial Intelligence and Data Innovation Consortium (ACADIC), York University, Toronto, Canada.
Benjamin LiebermanSchool of Physics and Institute for Collider Particle Physics, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa.
Nidhi TripathiSchool of Physics and Institute for Collider Particle Physics, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa.
Salah-Eddine DahbiSchool of Physics and Institute for Collider Particle Physics, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa.
Finn StevensonSchool of Physics and Institute for Collider Particle Physics, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa.
Nicola BragazziAfrica-Canada Artificial Intelligence and Data Innovation Consortium (ACADIC), York University, Toronto, Canada.
Jude KongAfrica-Canada Artificial Intelligence and Data Innovation Consortium (ACADIC), York University, Toronto, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7557-5672
Bruce MelladoSchool of Physics and Institute for Collider Particle Physics, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Manually labeling data for supervised learning is time and energy consuming; therefore, lexicon-based models such as VADER and TextBlob are used to automatically label data. However, it is argued that automated labels do not have the accuracy required for training an efficient model. Although automated labeling is frequently used for stance detection, automated stance labels have not been properly evaluated, in the previous works. In this work, to assess the accuracy of VADER and TextBlob automated labels for stance analysis, we first manually label a Twitter, now X, dataset related to M-pox stance detection. We then fine-tune different transformer-based models on the hand-labeled M-pox dataset, and compare their accuracy before and after fine-tuning, with the accuracy of automated labeled data. Our results indicated that the fine-tuned models surpassed the accuracy of VADER and TextBlob automated labels by up to 38% and 72.5%, respectively. Topic modeling further shows that fine-tuning diminished the scope of misclassified tweets to specific sub-topics. We conclude that fine-tuning transformer models on hand-labeled data for stance detection, elevates the accuracy to a superior level that is significantly higher than automated stance detection labels. This study verifies that automated stance detection labels are not reliable for sensitive use-cases such as health-related purposes. Manually labeled data is more convenient for developing Natural Language Processing (NLP) models that study and analyze mass opinions and conversations on social media platforms, during crises such as pandemics and epidemics.

Identifiers

PMID39078813
PMCPMC11288444

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.