ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2025
Decoding Digital Discourse Through Multimodal Text and Image Machine Learning Models to Classify Sentiment and Detect Hate Speech in Race- and Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer, Intersex, and Asexual Community-Related Posts on Social Media: Quantitative Study.
Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundA major challenge in sentiment analysis on social media is the increasing prevalence of image-based content, which integrates text and visuals to convey nuanced messages. Traditional text-based approaches have been widely used to assess public attitudes and beliefs; however, they often fail to fully capture the meaning of multimodal content where cultural, contextual, and visual elements play a significant role.
objectiveThis study aims to provide practical guidance for collecting, processing, and analyzing social media data using multimodal machine learning models. Specifically, it focuses on training and fine-tuning models to classify sentiment and detect hate speech.
methodsSocial media data were collected from Facebook and Instagram using CrowdTangle, a public insights tool by Meta, and from X via its academic research application programming interface. The dataset was filtered to include only race-related terms and lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, intersex, and asexual community-related posts with image attachments, ensuring focus on multimodal content. Human annotators labeled 13,000 posts into 4 categories: negative sentiment, positive sentiment, hate, or antihate. We evaluated unimodal (Bidirectional Encoder Representations from Transformers for text and Visual Geometry Group 16 for images) and multimodal (Contrastive Language-Image Pretraining [CLIP], Visual Bidirectional Encoder Representations from Transformers [VisualBERTs], and an intermediate fusion) models. To enhance model performance, the synthetic minority oversampling technique was applied to address class imbalances, and latent Dirichlet allocation was used to improve semantic representations.
resultsOur findings highlighted key differences in model performance. Among unimodal models, Bidirectional Encoder Representations from Transformer outperformed Visual Geometry Group 16, achieving higher accuracy and macro-F
conclusionsThis study contributes to the growing research on multimodal machine learning by demonstrating how advanced models, data augmentation techniques, and diverse datasets can enhance the analysis of social media content. The findings offer valuable insights for researchers, policy makers, and public health professionals seeking to leverage artificial intelligence for social media monitoring and addressing broader societal challenges.
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.