Classifying and fact-checking health-related information about COVID-19 on Twitter/X using machine learning and deep learning models.

IF 3.8 3区 医学 Q2 MEDICAL INFORMATICS BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making Pub Date : 2025-02-11 DOI:10.1186/s12911-025-02895-y
Elham Sharifpoor, Maryam Okhovati, Mostafa Ghazizadeh-Ahsaee, Mina Avaz Beigi
{"title":"Classifying and fact-checking health-related information about COVID-19 on Twitter/X using machine learning and deep learning models.","authors":"Elham Sharifpoor, Maryam Okhovati, Mostafa Ghazizadeh-Ahsaee, Mina Avaz Beigi","doi":"10.1186/s12911-025-02895-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Despite recent progress in misinformation detection methods, further investigation is required to develop more robust fact-checking models with particular consideration for the unique challenges of health information sharing. This study aimed to identify the most effective approach for detecting and classifying reliable information versus misinformation health content shared on Twitter/X related to COVID-19.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We have used 7 different machine learning/deep learning models. Tweets were collected, processed, labeled, and analyzed using relevant keywords and hashtags, then classified into two distinct datasets: \"Trustworthy information\" versus \"Misinformation\", through a labeling process. The cosine similarity metric was employed to address oversampling the minority of the Trustworthy information class, ensuring a more balanced representation of both classes for training and testing purposes. Finally, the performance of the various fact-checking models was analyzed and compared using accuracy, precision, recall, and F1-score ROC curve, and AUC.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>For measures of accuracy, precision, F1 score, and recall, the average values of TextConvoNet were found to be 90.28, 90.28, 90.29, and 0.9030, respectively. ROC AUC was 0.901.\"Trustworthy information\" class achieved an accuracy of 85%, precision of 93%, recall of 86%, and F1 score of 89%. These values were higher than other models. Moreover, its performance in the misinformation category was even more impressive, with an accuracy of 94%, precision of 88%, recall of 94%, and F1 score of 91%.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This study showed that TextConvoNet was the most effective in detecting and classifying trustworthy information V.S misinformation related to health issues that have been shared on Twitter/X.</p>","PeriodicalId":9340,"journal":{"name":"BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making","volume":"25 1","pages":"73"},"PeriodicalIF":3.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11817542/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12911-025-02895-y","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICAL INFORMATICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Despite recent progress in misinformation detection methods, further investigation is required to develop more robust fact-checking models with particular consideration for the unique challenges of health information sharing. This study aimed to identify the most effective approach for detecting and classifying reliable information versus misinformation health content shared on Twitter/X related to COVID-19.

Methods: We have used 7 different machine learning/deep learning models. Tweets were collected, processed, labeled, and analyzed using relevant keywords and hashtags, then classified into two distinct datasets: "Trustworthy information" versus "Misinformation", through a labeling process. The cosine similarity metric was employed to address oversampling the minority of the Trustworthy information class, ensuring a more balanced representation of both classes for training and testing purposes. Finally, the performance of the various fact-checking models was analyzed and compared using accuracy, precision, recall, and F1-score ROC curve, and AUC.

Results: For measures of accuracy, precision, F1 score, and recall, the average values of TextConvoNet were found to be 90.28, 90.28, 90.29, and 0.9030, respectively. ROC AUC was 0.901."Trustworthy information" class achieved an accuracy of 85%, precision of 93%, recall of 86%, and F1 score of 89%. These values were higher than other models. Moreover, its performance in the misinformation category was even more impressive, with an accuracy of 94%, precision of 88%, recall of 94%, and F1 score of 91%.

Conclusion: This study showed that TextConvoNet was the most effective in detecting and classifying trustworthy information V.S misinformation related to health issues that have been shared on Twitter/X.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
使用机器学习和深度学习模型对Twitter/X上有关COVID-19的健康相关信息进行分类和事实核查。
背景:尽管最近在错误信息检测方法方面取得了进展,但需要进一步调查,以开发更强大的事实核查模型,并特别考虑到卫生信息共享的独特挑战。本研究旨在确定检测和分类Twitter/X上与COVID-19相关的可靠信息与错误信息健康内容的最有效方法。方法:我们使用了7种不同的机器学习/深度学习模型。使用相关的关键词和标签对推文进行收集、处理、标记和分析,然后通过标记过程将其分为两个不同的数据集:“可信信息”和“错误信息”。余弦相似度度量用于解决可信信息类的少数过采样问题,确保两个类在训练和测试目的中的更平衡的表示。最后,使用准确率、精密度、召回率、f1评分ROC曲线和AUC对各种事实检查模型的性能进行了分析和比较。结果:对于准确度、精密度、F1分数和召回率的测量,TextConvoNet的平均值分别为90.28、90.28、90.29和0.9030。ROC AUC为0.901。“可信信息”类的准确率为85%,准确率为93%,召回率为86%,F1得分为89%。这些值高于其他模型。此外,它在错误信息分类中的表现更令人印象深刻,准确率为94%,精准度为88%,召回率为94%,F1得分为91%。结论:本研究表明,TextConvoNet在检测和分类可信信息方面最有效,而不是在Twitter/X上分享的与健康问题相关的错误信息。
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 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.20
自引率
5.70%
发文量
297
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making is an open access journal publishing original peer-reviewed research articles in relation to the design, development, implementation, use, and evaluation of health information technologies and decision-making for human health.
期刊最新文献
Development and psychometric evaluation of a decision quality instrument for lung cancer screening decisions (DQI-LCS). Quality evaluation of online platforms information for retail of prescription medicines in China: an observational study of the case of paroxetine. Development of a minimum data set for a pediatric and neonatal Medication Administration Clinical Decision Support System (MACDSS), mapped to FHIR: a mixed-methods research synthesis. Machine learning-based prediction of disability in subacute low back pain: a primary care study on clinical and psychosocial determinants. Electrocardiogram-based deep learning score for coronary artery calcification reclassifies cardiovascular risk and identifies screening candidates.
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1