A pandemic of COVID-19 mis- and disinformation: manual and automatic topic analysis of the literature.

Abdi D Wakene, Lauren N Cooper, John J Hanna, Trish M Perl, Christoph U Lehmann, Richard J Medford
{"title":"A pandemic of COVID-19 mis- and disinformation: manual and automatic topic analysis of the literature.","authors":"Abdi D Wakene, Lauren N Cooper, John J Hanna, Trish M Perl, Christoph U Lehmann, Richard J Medford","doi":"10.1017/ash.2024.379","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Social media's arrival eased the sharing of mis- and disinformation. False information proved challenging throughout the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic with many clinicians and researchers analyzing the \"infodemic.\" We systemically reviewed and synthesized COVID-19 mis- and disinformation literature, identifying the prevalence and content of false information and exploring mitigation and prevention strategies.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>We identified and analyzed publications on COVID-19-related mis- and disinformation published from March 1, 2020, to December 31, 2022, in PubMed. We performed a manual topic review of the abstracts along with automated topic modeling to organize and compare the different themes. We also conducted sentiment (ranked -3 to +3) and emotion analysis (rated as predominately happy, sad, angry, surprised, or fearful) of the abstracts.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We reviewed 868 peer-reviewed scientific publications of which 639 (74%) had abstracts available for automatic topic modeling and sentiment analysis. More than a third of publications described mitigation and prevention-related issues. The mean sentiment score for the publications was 0.685, and 56% of studies had a negative sentiment (fear and sadness as the most common emotions).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Our comprehensive analysis reveals a significant proliferation of dis- and misinformation research during the COVID-19 pandemic. Our study illustrates the pivotal role of social media in amplifying false information. Research into the infodemic was characterized by negative sentiments. Combining manual and automated topic modeling provided a nuanced understanding of the complexities of COVID-19-related misinformation, highlighting themes such as the source and effect of misinformation, and strategies for mitigation and prevention.</p>","PeriodicalId":72246,"journal":{"name":"Antimicrobial stewardship & healthcare epidemiology : ASHE","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11427977/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Antimicrobial stewardship & healthcare epidemiology : ASHE","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/ash.2024.379","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: Social media's arrival eased the sharing of mis- and disinformation. False information proved challenging throughout the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic with many clinicians and researchers analyzing the "infodemic." We systemically reviewed and synthesized COVID-19 mis- and disinformation literature, identifying the prevalence and content of false information and exploring mitigation and prevention strategies.

Design: We identified and analyzed publications on COVID-19-related mis- and disinformation published from March 1, 2020, to December 31, 2022, in PubMed. We performed a manual topic review of the abstracts along with automated topic modeling to organize and compare the different themes. We also conducted sentiment (ranked -3 to +3) and emotion analysis (rated as predominately happy, sad, angry, surprised, or fearful) of the abstracts.

Results: We reviewed 868 peer-reviewed scientific publications of which 639 (74%) had abstracts available for automatic topic modeling and sentiment analysis. More than a third of publications described mitigation and prevention-related issues. The mean sentiment score for the publications was 0.685, and 56% of studies had a negative sentiment (fear and sadness as the most common emotions).

Conclusions: Our comprehensive analysis reveals a significant proliferation of dis- and misinformation research during the COVID-19 pandemic. Our study illustrates the pivotal role of social media in amplifying false information. Research into the infodemic was characterized by negative sentiments. Combining manual and automated topic modeling provided a nuanced understanding of the complexities of COVID-19-related misinformation, highlighting themes such as the source and effect of misinformation, and strategies for mitigation and prevention.

COVID-19错误信息和虚假信息的大流行:人工和自动文献主题分析。
目标:社交媒体的出现缓解了错误信息和虚假信息的共享。在冠状病毒病 2019(COVID-19)大流行期间,虚假信息证明具有挑战性,许多临床医生和研究人员对 "信息流行 "进行了分析。我们对 COVID-19 误报和虚假信息文献进行了系统回顾和综合,确定了虚假信息的流行程度和内容,并探讨了缓解和预防策略:我们识别并分析了自 2020 年 3 月 1 日至 2022 年 12 月 31 日在 PubMed 上发表的与 COVID-19 相关的错误信息和虚假信息。我们对摘要进行了人工主题审查,并通过自动主题建模来组织和比较不同的主题。我们还对摘要进行了情感分析(排名-3 至 +3)和情绪分析(主要评为快乐、悲伤、愤怒、惊讶或恐惧):我们审查了 868 篇经同行评审的科学出版物,其中 639 篇(74%)的摘要可用于自动主题建模和情感分析。超过三分之一的出版物描述了与减灾和预防相关的问题。这些出版物的平均情感分数为 0.685,56% 的研究具有负面情感(恐惧和悲伤是最常见的情感):我们的综合分析表明,在 COVID-19 大流行期间,关于不实信息和错误信息的研究大量涌现。我们的研究说明了社交媒体在放大虚假信息方面的关键作用。信息疫情研究以负面情绪为特征。结合人工和自动主题建模,我们对与 COVID-19 相关的虚假信息的复杂性有了细致入微的了解,突出了虚假信息的来源和影响以及缓解和预防策略等主题。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信