了解COVID-19信息大流行:分析越南COVID-19爆发期间用户生成的在线信息。

IF 2.3 Q3 MEDICAL INFORMATICS
Healthcare Informatics Research Pub Date : 2022-10-01 Epub Date: 2022-10-31 DOI:10.4258/hir.2022.28.4.307
Ha-Linh Quach, Thai Quang Pham, Ngoc-Anh Hoang, Dinh Cong Phung, Viet-Cuong Nguyen, Son Hong Le, Thanh Cong Le, Dang Hai Le, Anh Duc Dang, Duong Nhu Tran, Nghia Duy Ngu, Florian Vogt, Cong-Khanh Nguyen
{"title":"了解COVID-19信息大流行:分析越南COVID-19爆发期间用户生成的在线信息。","authors":"Ha-Linh Quach,&nbsp;Thai Quang Pham,&nbsp;Ngoc-Anh Hoang,&nbsp;Dinh Cong Phung,&nbsp;Viet-Cuong Nguyen,&nbsp;Son Hong Le,&nbsp;Thanh Cong Le,&nbsp;Dang Hai Le,&nbsp;Anh Duc Dang,&nbsp;Duong Nhu Tran,&nbsp;Nghia Duy Ngu,&nbsp;Florian Vogt,&nbsp;Cong-Khanh Nguyen","doi":"10.4258/hir.2022.28.4.307","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Online misinformation has reached unprecedented levels during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. This study analyzed the magnitude and sentiment dynamics of misinformation and unverified information about public health interventions during a COVID-19 outbreak in Da Nang, Vietnam, between July and September 2020.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We analyzed user-generated online information about five public health interventions during the Da Nang outbreak. We compared the volume, source, sentiment polarity, and engagements of online posts before, during, and after the outbreak using negative binomial and logistic regression, and assessed the content validity of the 500 most influential posts.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Most of the 54,528 online posts included were generated during the outbreak (n = 46,035; 84.42%) and by online newspapers (n = 32,034; 58.75%). Among the 500 most influential posts, 316 (63.20%) contained genuine information, 10 (2.00%) contained misinformation, 152 (30.40%) were non-factual opinions, and 22 (4.40%) contained unverifiable information. All misinformation posts were made during the outbreak, mostly on social media, and were predominantly negative. Higher levels of engagement were observed for information that was unverifiable (incidence relative risk [IRR] = 2.83; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.33-0.62), posted during the outbreak (before: IRR = 0.15; 95% CI, 0.07-0.35; after: IRR = 0.46; 95% CI, 0.34-0.63), and with negative sentiment (IRR = 1.84; 95% CI, 1.23-2.75). Negatively toned posts were more likely to be misinformation (odds ratio [OR] = 9.59; 95% CI, 1.20-76.70) or unverified (OR = 5.03; 95% CI, 1.66-15.24).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Misinformation and unverified information during the outbreak showed clustering, with social media being particularly affected. This indepth assessment demonstrates the value of analyzing online \"infodemics\" to inform public health responses.</p>","PeriodicalId":12947,"journal":{"name":"Healthcare Informatics Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/55/a6/hir-2022-28-4-307.PMC9672499.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Understanding the COVID-19 Infodemic: Analyzing User-Generated Online Information During a COVID-19 Outbreak in Vietnam.\",\"authors\":\"Ha-Linh Quach,&nbsp;Thai Quang Pham,&nbsp;Ngoc-Anh Hoang,&nbsp;Dinh Cong Phung,&nbsp;Viet-Cuong Nguyen,&nbsp;Son Hong Le,&nbsp;Thanh Cong Le,&nbsp;Dang Hai Le,&nbsp;Anh Duc Dang,&nbsp;Duong Nhu Tran,&nbsp;Nghia Duy Ngu,&nbsp;Florian Vogt,&nbsp;Cong-Khanh Nguyen\",\"doi\":\"10.4258/hir.2022.28.4.307\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Online misinformation has reached unprecedented levels during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. This study analyzed the magnitude and sentiment dynamics of misinformation and unverified information about public health interventions during a COVID-19 outbreak in Da Nang, Vietnam, between July and September 2020.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We analyzed user-generated online information about five public health interventions during the Da Nang outbreak. We compared the volume, source, sentiment polarity, and engagements of online posts before, during, and after the outbreak using negative binomial and logistic regression, and assessed the content validity of the 500 most influential posts.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Most of the 54,528 online posts included were generated during the outbreak (n = 46,035; 84.42%) and by online newspapers (n = 32,034; 58.75%). Among the 500 most influential posts, 316 (63.20%) contained genuine information, 10 (2.00%) contained misinformation, 152 (30.40%) were non-factual opinions, and 22 (4.40%) contained unverifiable information. All misinformation posts were made during the outbreak, mostly on social media, and were predominantly negative. Higher levels of engagement were observed for information that was unverifiable (incidence relative risk [IRR] = 2.83; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.33-0.62), posted during the outbreak (before: IRR = 0.15; 95% CI, 0.07-0.35; after: IRR = 0.46; 95% CI, 0.34-0.63), and with negative sentiment (IRR = 1.84; 95% CI, 1.23-2.75). Negatively toned posts were more likely to be misinformation (odds ratio [OR] = 9.59; 95% CI, 1.20-76.70) or unverified (OR = 5.03; 95% CI, 1.66-15.24).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Misinformation and unverified information during the outbreak showed clustering, with social media being particularly affected. This indepth assessment demonstrates the value of analyzing online \\\"infodemics\\\" to inform public health responses.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12947,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Healthcare Informatics Research\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/55/a6/hir-2022-28-4-307.PMC9672499.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Healthcare Informatics Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4258/hir.2022.28.4.307\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2022/10/31 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICAL INFORMATICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Healthcare Informatics Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4258/hir.2022.28.4.307","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/10/31 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MEDICAL INFORMATICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目标:在2019冠状病毒病(COVID-19)大流行期间,网络错误信息达到了前所未有的水平。本研究分析了2020年7月至9月在越南岘港爆发COVID-19期间有关公共卫生干预措施的错误信息和未经证实的信息的规模和情绪动态。方法:我们分析了岘港爆发期间用户生成的关于五项公共卫生干预措施的在线信息。我们使用负二项回归和逻辑回归比较了疫情爆发前、期间和之后在线帖子的数量、来源、情绪极性和参与度,并评估了500个最具影响力的帖子的内容效度。结果:纳入的54,528篇在线帖子中,大多数是在疫情期间生成的(n = 46,035;84.42%)和在线报纸(n = 32,034;58.75%)。在500个最具影响力的帖子中,真实信息316个(63.20%),虚假信息10个(2.00%),非事实意见152个(30.40%),不可验证信息22个(4.40%)。所有的错误信息都是在疫情爆发期间发布的,主要是在社交媒体上,而且主要是负面的。对于无法验证的信息,观察到更高的参与度(发病率相对风险[IRR] = 2.83;95%可信区间[CI], 1.33-0.62),在疫情爆发期间发布(之前:IRR = 0.15;95% ci, 0.07-0.35;后:IRR = 0.46;95% CI, 0.34-0.63),并伴有负面情绪(IRR = 1.84;95% ci, 1.23-2.75)。负面语调的帖子更有可能是错误信息(优势比[OR] = 9.59;95% CI, 1.20-76.70)或未经验证(or = 5.03;95% ci, 1.66-15.24)。结论:疫情期间的错误信息和未经核实的信息呈现聚集性,社交媒体受到的影响尤为明显。这一深度评估显示了分析在线“信息流行病”为公共卫生应对提供信息的价值。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Understanding the COVID-19 Infodemic: Analyzing User-Generated Online Information During a COVID-19 Outbreak in Vietnam.

Understanding the COVID-19 Infodemic: Analyzing User-Generated Online Information During a COVID-19 Outbreak in Vietnam.

Understanding the COVID-19 Infodemic: Analyzing User-Generated Online Information During a COVID-19 Outbreak in Vietnam.

Understanding the COVID-19 Infodemic: Analyzing User-Generated Online Information During a COVID-19 Outbreak in Vietnam.

Objectives: Online misinformation has reached unprecedented levels during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. This study analyzed the magnitude and sentiment dynamics of misinformation and unverified information about public health interventions during a COVID-19 outbreak in Da Nang, Vietnam, between July and September 2020.

Methods: We analyzed user-generated online information about five public health interventions during the Da Nang outbreak. We compared the volume, source, sentiment polarity, and engagements of online posts before, during, and after the outbreak using negative binomial and logistic regression, and assessed the content validity of the 500 most influential posts.

Results: Most of the 54,528 online posts included were generated during the outbreak (n = 46,035; 84.42%) and by online newspapers (n = 32,034; 58.75%). Among the 500 most influential posts, 316 (63.20%) contained genuine information, 10 (2.00%) contained misinformation, 152 (30.40%) were non-factual opinions, and 22 (4.40%) contained unverifiable information. All misinformation posts were made during the outbreak, mostly on social media, and were predominantly negative. Higher levels of engagement were observed for information that was unverifiable (incidence relative risk [IRR] = 2.83; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.33-0.62), posted during the outbreak (before: IRR = 0.15; 95% CI, 0.07-0.35; after: IRR = 0.46; 95% CI, 0.34-0.63), and with negative sentiment (IRR = 1.84; 95% CI, 1.23-2.75). Negatively toned posts were more likely to be misinformation (odds ratio [OR] = 9.59; 95% CI, 1.20-76.70) or unverified (OR = 5.03; 95% CI, 1.66-15.24).

Conclusions: Misinformation and unverified information during the outbreak showed clustering, with social media being particularly affected. This indepth assessment demonstrates the value of analyzing online "infodemics" to inform public health responses.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Healthcare Informatics Research
Healthcare Informatics Research MEDICAL INFORMATICS-
CiteScore
4.90
自引率
6.90%
发文量
44
×
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