Paige Martin

Eliza Harrison, Paige Martin, Didi Surian et al.

Online health communications often provide biased interpretations of evidence and have unreliable links to the source research. We tested the feasibility of a tool for matching webpages to their source evidence. From 207,538 eligible vaccination-related PubMed articles, we evaluated several approaches using 3,573 unique links to webpages from Altmetric. We evaluated methods for ranking the source articles for vaccine-related research described on webpages, comparing simple baseline feature representation and dimensionality reduction approaches to those augmented with canonical correlation analysis (CCA). Performance measures included the median rank of the correct source article; the percentage of webpages for which the source article was correctly ranked first (recall@1); and the percentage ranked within the top 50 candidate articles (recall@50). While augmenting baseline methods using CCA generally improved results, no CCA-based approach outperformed a baseline method, which ranked the correct source article first for over one quarter of webpages and in the top 50 for more than half. Tools to help people identify evidence-based sources for the content they access on vaccination-related webpages are potentially feasible and may support the prevention of bias and misrepresentation of research in news and social media.

Zubair Shah, Paige Martin, Enrico Coiera et al.

Background: Studies examining how sentiment on social media varies depending on timing and location appear to produce inconsistent results, making it hard to design systems that use sentiment to detect localized events for public health applications. Objective: The aim of this study was to measure how common timing and location confounders explain variation in sentiment on Twitter. Methods: Using a dataset of 16.54 million English-language tweets from 100 cities posted between July 13 and November 30, 2017, we estimated the positive and negative sentiment for each of the cities using a dictionary-based sentiment analysis and constructed models to explain the differences in sentiment using time of day, day of week, weather, city, and interaction type (conversations or broadcasting) as factors and found that all factors were independently associated with sentiment. Results: In the full multivariable model of positive (Pearson r in test data 0.236; 95\% CI 0.231-0.241) and negative (Pearson r in test data 0.306; 95\% CI 0.301-0.310) sentiment, the city and time of day explained more of the variance than weather and day of week. Models that account for these confounders produce a different distribution and ranking of important events compared with models that do not account for these confounders. Conclusions: In public health applications that aim to detect localized events by aggregating sentiment across populations of Twitter users, it is worthwhile accounting for baseline differences before looking for unexpected changes.