ArticleAlzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association2025
Exploring public perceptions of dementia on Twitter (X): a cross-cultural analysis.
Article in Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association, 2025. 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.
- Exploring public perceptions of dementia on Twitter (X): a cross-cultural analysis.Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association · 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
introductionTwitter (X) is widely used to reflect individual perspectives. We wished to study social insight regarding dementia using this digital platform.
methodsWe conducted a cross-sectional study retrieving tweets containing "dementia" or "#dementia" and their Thai equivalents. English tweets were randomly selected, while all Thai tweets were collected. We identified user types, topics, and sentiments.
resultsOf 10,062 English and 9511 Thai tweets, general users were the most prevalent in both languages. "Dementia" was used accurately in 39.0% of English tweets and as misinformation in 49.2% of Thai tweets. Stigma was significantly more common in English (38.9%) than in Thai (22.6%) tweets (p-value < 0.001), and negative perceptions were expressed in 44.2% and 81.3% of English and Thai tweets, respectively (p-value < 0.001). DISCUSSION: Different inappropriate uses of "dementia" were observed. To alleviate negative perceptions, reducing stigmatization is urgently needed in English-speaking communities, whereas in Thailand, appropriate dementia education should be undertaken immediately. HIGHLIGHTS: We found differences in the perceptions of "dementia" between English and Thai tweets. Using "dementia" to attack individuals was common among English Twitter (X) users. "Misinformation" regarding the term "dementia" was observed among Thai users.
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.