首页 > 最新文献

JMIR infodemiology最新文献

英文 中文
US Black Maternal Health Advocacy Topics and Trends on Twitter: Temporal Infoveillance Study 推特上的美国黑人孕产妇健康倡导主题和趋势:时间信息监测研究
Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES Pub Date : 2022-04-20 DOI: 10.2196/30885
D. Grigsby-Toussaint, Ashley Champagne, Justin Uhr, Elizabeth Silva, Madeline Noh, Adam Bradley, Patrick Rashleigh
Background Black women in the United States disproportionately suffer adverse pregnancy and birth outcomes compared to White women. Economic adversity and implicit bias during clinical encounters may lead to physiological responses that place Black women at higher risk for adverse birth outcomes. The novel coronavirus disease of 2019 (COVID-19) further exacerbated this risk, as safety protocols increased social isolation in clinical settings, thereby limiting opportunities to advocate for unbiased care. Twitter, 1 of the most popular social networking sites, has been used to study a variety of issues of public interest, including health care. This study considers whether posts on Twitter accurately reflect public discourse during the COVID-19 pandemic and are being used in infodemiology studies by public health experts. Objective This study aims to assess the feasibility of Twitter for identifying public discourse related to social determinants of health and advocacy that influence maternal health among Black women across the United States and to examine trends in sentiment between 2019 and 2020 in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods Tweets were collected from March 1 to July 13, 2020, from 21 organizations and influencers and from 4 hashtags that focused on Black maternal health. Additionally, tweets from the same organizations and hashtags were collected from the year prior, from March 1 to July 13, 2019. Twint, a Python programming library, was used for data collection and analysis. We gathered the text of approximately 17,000 tweets, as well as all publicly available metadata. Topic modeling and k-means clustering were used to analyze the tweets. Results A variety of trends were observed when comparing the 2020 data set to the 2019 data set from the same period. The percentages listed for each topic are probabilities of that topic occurring in our corpus. In our topic models, tweets on reproductive justice, maternal mortality crises, and patient care increased by 67.46% in 2020 versus 2019. Topics on community, advocacy, and health equity increased by over 30% in 2020 versus 2019. In contrast, tweet topics that decreased in 2020 versus 2019 were as follows: tweets on Medicaid and medical coverage decreased by 27.73%, and discussions about creating space for Black women decreased by just under 30%. Conclusions The results indicate that the COVID-19 pandemic may have spurred an increased focus on advocating for improved reproductive health and maternal health outcomes among Black women in the United States. Further analyses are needed to capture a longer time frame that encompasses more of the pandemic, as well as more diverse voices to confirm the robustness of the findings. We also concluded that Twitter is an effective source for providing a snapshot of relevant topics to guide Black maternal health advocacy efforts.
与白人妇女相比,美国黑人妇女遭受不良妊娠和分娩结果的比例过高。临床接触中的经济逆境和隐性偏见可能导致生理反应,使黑人妇女面临更高的不良分娩结果风险。2019年新型冠状病毒病(COVID-19)进一步加剧了这一风险,因为安全协议增加了临床环境中的社会隔离,从而限制了倡导公正护理的机会。Twitter是最受欢迎的社交网站之一,它被用来研究各种公众感兴趣的问题,包括医疗保健。这项研究考虑了推特上的帖子是否准确地反映了COVID-19大流行期间的公众话语,并被公共卫生专家用于信息流行病学研究。本研究旨在评估Twitter在识别与影响美国黑人女性孕产妇健康的健康社会决定因素和宣传相关的公共话语方面的可行性,并研究2019年至2020年在COVID-19大流行背景下的情绪趋势。方法收集2020年3月1日至7月13日期间来自21个组织和影响者以及4个关注黑人孕产妇健康的标签的推文。此外,从2019年3月1日到7月13日,收集了来自相同组织和标签的推文。使用Python编程库Twint进行数据收集和分析。我们收集了大约17,000条推文的文本,以及所有公开可用的元数据。使用主题建模和k-means聚类对推文进行分析。结果对比2020年和2019年的同期数据,发现了多种趋势。每个主题列出的百分比是该主题在语料库中出现的概率。在我们的主题模型中,与2019年相比,2020年关于生殖正义、孕产妇死亡危机和患者护理的推文增加了67.46%。与2019年相比,2020年有关社区、宣传和卫生公平的主题增加了30%以上。相比之下,2020年与2019年相比,推特话题减少如下:关于医疗补助和医疗覆盖的推文减少了27.73%,关于为黑人女性创造空间的讨论减少了不到30%。研究结果表明,2019冠状病毒病大流行可能促使人们更加关注倡导改善美国黑人女性的生殖健康和孕产妇健康结果。需要进一步分析,以涵盖更长的时间框架,涵盖更多的大流行时期,并需要更多样化的声音,以确认调查结果的稳健性。我们还得出结论,Twitter是提供相关主题快照的有效来源,可以指导黑人孕产妇健康宣传工作。
{"title":"US Black Maternal Health Advocacy Topics and Trends on Twitter: Temporal Infoveillance Study","authors":"D. Grigsby-Toussaint, Ashley Champagne, Justin Uhr, Elizabeth Silva, Madeline Noh, Adam Bradley, Patrick Rashleigh","doi":"10.2196/30885","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2196/30885","url":null,"abstract":"Background Black women in the United States disproportionately suffer adverse pregnancy and birth outcomes compared to White women. Economic adversity and implicit bias during clinical encounters may lead to physiological responses that place Black women at higher risk for adverse birth outcomes. The novel coronavirus disease of 2019 (COVID-19) further exacerbated this risk, as safety protocols increased social isolation in clinical settings, thereby limiting opportunities to advocate for unbiased care. Twitter, 1 of the most popular social networking sites, has been used to study a variety of issues of public interest, including health care. This study considers whether posts on Twitter accurately reflect public discourse during the COVID-19 pandemic and are being used in infodemiology studies by public health experts. Objective This study aims to assess the feasibility of Twitter for identifying public discourse related to social determinants of health and advocacy that influence maternal health among Black women across the United States and to examine trends in sentiment between 2019 and 2020 in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods Tweets were collected from March 1 to July 13, 2020, from 21 organizations and influencers and from 4 hashtags that focused on Black maternal health. Additionally, tweets from the same organizations and hashtags were collected from the year prior, from March 1 to July 13, 2019. Twint, a Python programming library, was used for data collection and analysis. We gathered the text of approximately 17,000 tweets, as well as all publicly available metadata. Topic modeling and k-means clustering were used to analyze the tweets. Results A variety of trends were observed when comparing the 2020 data set to the 2019 data set from the same period. The percentages listed for each topic are probabilities of that topic occurring in our corpus. In our topic models, tweets on reproductive justice, maternal mortality crises, and patient care increased by 67.46% in 2020 versus 2019. Topics on community, advocacy, and health equity increased by over 30% in 2020 versus 2019. In contrast, tweet topics that decreased in 2020 versus 2019 were as follows: tweets on Medicaid and medical coverage decreased by 27.73%, and discussions about creating space for Black women decreased by just under 30%. Conclusions The results indicate that the COVID-19 pandemic may have spurred an increased focus on advocating for improved reproductive health and maternal health outcomes among Black women in the United States. Further analyses are needed to capture a longer time frame that encompasses more of the pandemic, as well as more diverse voices to confirm the robustness of the findings. We also concluded that Twitter is an effective source for providing a snapshot of relevant topics to guide Black maternal health advocacy efforts.","PeriodicalId":73554,"journal":{"name":"JMIR infodemiology","volume":"2 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-04-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44748924","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
Identifying Frames of the COVID-19 Infodemic: Thematic Analysis of Misinformation Stories Across Media. 识别 COVID-19 信息流行的框架:跨媒体误传故事的专题分析。
IF 3.5 Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES Pub Date : 2022-04-13 eCollection Date: 2022-01-01 DOI: 10.2196/33827
Ehsan Mohammadi, Iman Tahamtan, Yazdan Mansourian, Holly Overton

Background: The word "infodemic" refers to the deluge of false information about an event, and it is a global challenge for today's society. The sheer volume of misinformation circulating during the COVID-19 pandemic has been harmful to people around the world. Therefore, it is important to study different aspects of misinformation related to the pandemic.

Objective: This paper aimed to identify the main subthemes related to COVID-19 misinformation on various platforms, from traditional outlets to social media. This paper aimed to place these subthemes into categories, track the changes, and explore patterns in prevalence, over time, across different platforms and contexts.

Methods: From a theoretical perspective, this research was rooted in framing theory; it also employed thematic analysis to identify the main themes and subthemes related to COVID-19 misinformation. The data were collected from 8 fact-checking websites that formed a sample of 127 pieces of false COVID-19 news published from January 1, 2020 to March 30, 2020.

Results: The findings revealed 4 main themes (attribution, impact, protection and solutions, and politics) and 19 unique subthemes within those themes related to COVID-19 misinformation. Governmental and political organizations (institutional level) and administrators and politicians (individual level) were the 2 most frequent subthemes, followed by origination and source, home remedies, fake statistics, treatments, drugs, and pseudoscience, among others. Results indicate that the prevalence of misinformation subthemes had altered over time between January 2020 and March 2020. For instance, false stories about the origin and source of the virus were frequent initially (January). Misinformation regarding home remedies became a prominent subtheme in the middle (February), while false information related to government organizations and politicians became popular later (March). Although conspiracy theory web pages and social media outlets were the primary sources of misinformation, surprisingly, results revealed trusted platforms such as official government outlets and news organizations were also avenues for creating COVID-19 misinformation.

Conclusions: The identified themes in this study reflect some of the information attitudes and behaviors, such as denial, uncertainty, consequences, and solution-seeking, that provided rich information grounds to create different types of misinformation during the COVID-19 pandemic. Some themes also indicate that the application of effective communication strategies and the creation of timely content were used to persuade human minds with false stories in different phases of the crisis. The findings of this study can be beneficial for communication officers, information professionals, and policy makers to combat misinformation in future global health crises or related events.

背景:信息瘟疫 "一词是指有关某一事件的大量虚假信息,它是当今社会面临的一项全球性挑战。在 COVID-19 大流行期间流传的大量错误信息对全世界人民造成了伤害。因此,研究与该大流行病相关的错误信息的各个方面非常重要:本文旨在确定从传统渠道到社交媒体等各种平台上与 COVID-19 误传相关的主要次主题。本文旨在将这些次主题归类,跟踪其变化,并探索随着时间推移,在不同平台和背景下的流行模式:从理论角度看,本研究植根于框架理论;它还采用了主题分析法来确定与 COVID-19 误报相关的主要主题和次主题。数据收集自 8 个事实核查网站,这些网站是 2020 年 1 月 1 日至 2020 年 3 月 30 日期间发布的 127 篇 COVID-19 虚假新闻的样本:研究结果揭示了与COVID-19虚假信息相关的4大主题(归因、影响、保护和解决方案以及政治)和这些主题中的19个独特的次主题。政府和政治组织(机构层面)以及行政人员和政治家(个人层面)是最常见的两个副主题,其次是起源和来源、家庭疗法、虚假统计数据、治疗方法、药物和伪科学等。结果表明,在 2020 年 1 月至 2020 年 3 月期间,错误信息次主题的流行率随时间推移而发生了变化。例如,最初(1 月),关于病毒起源和来源的虚假故事很常见。与家庭疗法有关的虚假信息在中期(2 月)成为一个突出的副主题,而与政府组织和政客有关的虚假信息则在后期(3 月)变得流行起来。虽然阴谋论网页和社交媒体是错误信息的主要来源,但令人惊讶的是,研究结果显示,政府官方机构和新闻组织等可信平台也是制造 COVID-19 错误信息的渠道:本研究确定的主题反映了一些信息态度和行为,如否认、不确定性、后果和寻求解决方案等,这些态度和行为为在 COVID-19 大流行期间制造不同类型的错误信息提供了丰富的信息基础。一些主题还表明,在危机的不同阶段,有效传播策略的应用和及时内容的创造被用来用虚假故事说服人的思想。本研究的结果将有助于传播官员、信息专业人员和政策制定者在未来的全球健康危机或相关事件中打击错误信息。
{"title":"Identifying Frames of the COVID-19 Infodemic: Thematic Analysis of Misinformation Stories Across Media.","authors":"Ehsan Mohammadi, Iman Tahamtan, Yazdan Mansourian, Holly Overton","doi":"10.2196/33827","DOIUrl":"10.2196/33827","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The word \"infodemic\" refers to the deluge of false information about an event, and it is a global challenge for today's society. The sheer volume of misinformation circulating during the COVID-19 pandemic has been harmful to people around the world. Therefore, it is important to study different aspects of misinformation related to the pandemic.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>This paper aimed to identify the main subthemes related to COVID-19 misinformation on various platforms, from traditional outlets to social media. This paper aimed to place these subthemes into categories, track the changes, and explore patterns in prevalence, over time, across different platforms and contexts.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>From a theoretical perspective, this research was rooted in framing theory; it also employed thematic analysis to identify the main themes and subthemes related to COVID-19 misinformation. The data were collected from 8 fact-checking websites that formed a sample of 127 pieces of false COVID-19 news published from January 1, 2020 to March 30, 2020.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The findings revealed 4 main themes (attribution, impact, protection and solutions, and politics) and 19 unique subthemes within those themes related to COVID-19 misinformation. Governmental and political organizations (institutional level) and administrators and politicians (individual level) were the 2 most frequent subthemes, followed by origination and source, home remedies, fake statistics, treatments, drugs, and pseudoscience, among others. Results indicate that the prevalence of misinformation subthemes had altered over time between January 2020 and March 2020. For instance, false stories about the origin and source of the virus were frequent initially (January). Misinformation regarding home remedies became a prominent subtheme in the middle (February), while false information related to government organizations and politicians became popular later (March). Although conspiracy theory web pages and social media outlets were the primary sources of misinformation, surprisingly, results revealed trusted platforms such as official government outlets and news organizations were also avenues for creating COVID-19 misinformation.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The identified themes in this study reflect some of the information attitudes and behaviors, such as denial, uncertainty, consequences, and solution-seeking, that provided rich information grounds to create different types of misinformation during the COVID-19 pandemic. Some themes also indicate that the application of effective communication strategies and the creation of timely content were used to persuade human minds with false stories in different phases of the crisis. The findings of this study can be beneficial for communication officers, information professionals, and policy makers to combat misinformation in future global health crises or related events.</p>","PeriodicalId":73554,"journal":{"name":"JMIR infodemiology","volume":"2 1","pages":"e33827"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5,"publicationDate":"2022-04-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9987193/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"9363930","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
COVID-19 and Vitamin D Misinformation on YouTube: Content Analysis. YouTube 上的 COVID-19 和维生素 D 错误信息:内容分析。
IF 3.5 Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES Pub Date : 2022-03-14 eCollection Date: 2022-01-01 DOI: 10.2196/32452
Emma K Quinn, Shelby Fenton, Chelsea A Ford-Sahibzada, Andrew Harper, Alessandro R Marcon, Timothy Caulfield, Sajjad S Fazel, Cheryl E Peters

Background: The "infodemic" accompanying the SARS-CoV-2 virus pandemic has the potential to increase avoidable spread as well as engagement in risky health behaviors. Although social media platforms, such as YouTube, can be an inexpensive and effective method of sharing accurate health information, inaccurate and misleading information shared on YouTube can be dangerous for viewers. The confusing nature of data and claims surrounding the benefits of vitamin D, particularly in the prevention or cure of COVID-19, influences both viewers and the general "immune boosting" commercial interest.

Objective: The aim of this study was to ascertain how information on vitamin D and COVID-19 was presented on YouTube in 2020.

Methods: YouTube video results for the search terms "COVID," "coronavirus," and "vitamin D" were collected and analyzed for content themes and deemed useful or misleading based on the accuracy or inaccuracy of the content. Qualitative content analysis and simple statistical analysis were used to determine the prevalence and frequency of concerning content, such as confusing correlation with causation regarding vitamin D benefits.

Results: In total, 77 videos with a combined 10,225,763 views (at the time of data collection) were included in the analysis, with over three-quarters of them containing misleading content about COVID-19 and vitamin D. In addition, 45 (58%) of the 77 videos confused the relationship between vitamin D and COVID-19, with 46 (85%) of 54 videos stating that vitamin D has preventative or curative abilities. The major contributors to these videos were medical professionals with YouTube accounts. Vitamin D recommendations that do not align with the current literature were frequently suggested, including taking supplementation higher than the recommended safe dosage or seeking intentional solar UV radiation exposure.

Conclusions: The spread of misinformation is particularly alarming when spread by medical professionals, and existing data suggesting vitamin D has immune-boosting abilities can add to viewer confusion or mistrust in health information. Further, the suggestions made in the videos may increase the risks of other poor health outcomes, such as skin cancer from solar UV radiation.

背景:伴随 SARS-CoV-2 病毒大流行而来的 "信息流行病 "有可能增加可避免的传播以及参与危险的健康行为。尽管 YouTube 等社交媒体平台可以成为分享准确健康信息的廉价而有效的方法,但在 YouTube 上分享的不准确和误导性信息可能会对观众造成危害。围绕维生素 D 的益处,特别是在预防或治疗 COVID-19 方面的益处,其数据和说法的混淆性影响了观众和 "提高免疫力 "的普遍商业利益:本研究旨在确定 2020 年 YouTube 上是如何介绍维生素 D 和 COVID-19 的:收集并分析了以 "COVID"、"冠状病毒 "和 "维生素D "为搜索关键词的YouTube视频结果的内容主题,并根据内容的准确性或不准确性判定其有用性或误导性。定性内容分析和简单统计分析用于确定相关内容的普遍性和频率,如混淆维生素 D 益处的相关性和因果关系:此外,77 个视频中有 45 个(58%)混淆了维生素 D 与 COVID-19 之间的关系,54 个视频中有 46 个(85%)声称维生素 D 具有预防或治疗作用。这些视频的主要贡献者是拥有 YouTube 账户的医疗专业人士。视频中经常提出与当前文献不符的维生素 D 建议,包括服用高于推荐安全剂量的补充剂或有意寻求太阳紫外线辐射照射:由医疗专业人员传播的错误信息尤其令人担忧,而现有数据表明维生素 D 有增强免疫力的作用,这可能会增加观众对健康信息的困惑或不信任。此外,视频中的建议可能会增加其他不良健康后果的风险,如太阳紫外线辐射导致的皮肤癌。
{"title":"COVID-19 and Vitamin D Misinformation on YouTube: Content Analysis.","authors":"Emma K Quinn, Shelby Fenton, Chelsea A Ford-Sahibzada, Andrew Harper, Alessandro R Marcon, Timothy Caulfield, Sajjad S Fazel, Cheryl E Peters","doi":"10.2196/32452","DOIUrl":"10.2196/32452","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The \"infodemic\" accompanying the SARS-CoV-2 virus pandemic has the potential to increase avoidable spread as well as engagement in risky health behaviors. Although social media platforms, such as YouTube, can be an inexpensive and effective method of sharing accurate health information, inaccurate and misleading information shared on YouTube can be dangerous for viewers. The confusing nature of data and claims surrounding the benefits of vitamin D, particularly in the prevention or cure of COVID-19, influences both viewers and the general \"immune boosting\" commercial interest.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>The aim of this study was to ascertain how information on vitamin D and COVID-19 was presented on YouTube in 2020.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>YouTube video results for the search terms \"COVID,\" \"coronavirus,\" and \"vitamin D\" were collected and analyzed for content themes and deemed useful or misleading based on the accuracy or inaccuracy of the content. Qualitative content analysis and simple statistical analysis were used to determine the prevalence and frequency of concerning content, such as confusing correlation with causation regarding vitamin D benefits.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In total, 77 videos with a combined 10,225,763 views (at the time of data collection) were included in the analysis, with over three-quarters of them containing misleading content about COVID-19 and vitamin D. In addition, 45 (58%) of the 77 videos confused the relationship between vitamin D and COVID-19, with 46 (85%) of 54 videos stating that vitamin D has preventative or curative abilities. The major contributors to these videos were medical professionals with YouTube accounts. Vitamin D recommendations that do not align with the current literature were frequently suggested, including taking supplementation higher than the recommended safe dosage or seeking intentional solar UV radiation exposure.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The spread of misinformation is particularly alarming when spread by medical professionals, and existing data suggesting vitamin D has immune-boosting abilities can add to viewer confusion or mistrust in health information. Further, the suggestions made in the videos may increase the risks of other poor health outcomes, such as skin cancer from solar UV radiation.</p>","PeriodicalId":73554,"journal":{"name":"JMIR infodemiology","volume":"2 1","pages":"e32452"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5,"publicationDate":"2022-03-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8924908/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"9704499","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Identifying the Socioeconomic, Demographic, and Political Determinants of Social Mobility and Their Effects on COVID-19 Cases and Deaths: Evidence From US Counties. 识别社会流动性的社会经济、人口和政治决定因素及其对 COVID-19 病例和死亡的影响:来自美国各县的证据。
IF 3.5 Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES Pub Date : 2022-03-03 eCollection Date: 2022-01-01 DOI: 10.2196/31813
Niloofar Jalali, N Ken Tran, Anindya Sen, Plinio Pelegrini Morita

Background: The spread of COVID-19 at the local level is significantly impacted by population mobility. The U.S. has had extremely high per capita COVID-19 case and death rates. Efficient nonpharmaceutical interventions to control the spread of COVID-19 depend on our understanding of the determinants of public mobility.

Objective: This study used publicly available Google data and machine learning to investigate population mobility across a sample of US counties. Statistical analysis was used to examine the socioeconomic, demographic, and political determinants of mobility and the corresponding patterns of per capita COVID-19 case and death rates.

Methods: Daily Google population mobility data for 1085 US counties from March 1 to December 31, 2020, were clustered based on differences in mobility patterns using K-means clustering methods. Social mobility indicators (retail, grocery and pharmacy, workplace, and residence) were compared across clusters. Statistical differences in socioeconomic, demographic, and political variables between clusters were explored to identify determinants of mobility. Clusters were matched with daily per capita COVID-19 cases and deaths.

Results: Our results grouped US counties into 4 Google mobility clusters. Clusters with more population mobility had a higher percentage of the population aged 65 years and over, a greater population share of Whites with less than high school and college education, a larger percentage of the population with less than a college education, a lower percentage of the population using public transit to work, and a smaller share of voters who voted for Clinton during the 2016 presidential election. Furthermore, clusters with greater population mobility experienced a sharp increase in per capita COVID-19 case and death rates from November to December 2020.

Conclusions: Republican-leaning counties that are characterized by certain demographic characteristics had higher increases in social mobility and ultimately experienced a more significant incidence of COVID-19 during the latter part of 2020.

背景:COVID-19 在地方一级的传播受到人口流动的极大影响。美国的人均 COVID-19 感染率和死亡率极高。控制 COVID-19 传播的高效非药物干预措施取决于我们对公众流动性决定因素的了解:本研究利用公开的谷歌数据和机器学习来调查美国各县的人口流动情况。统计分析用于研究人口流动的社会经济、人口和政治决定因素以及人均 COVID-19 病例和死亡率的相应模式:根据流动模式的差异,使用 K-均值聚类方法对 2020 年 3 月 1 日至 12 月 31 日期间美国 1085 个县的每日谷歌人口流动数据进行聚类。比较了不同聚类的社会流动性指标(零售、杂货店和药店、工作场所和居住地)。探讨了不同聚类之间社会经济、人口和政治变量的统计差异,以确定流动性的决定因素。各聚类与每日人均 COVID-19 病例和死亡人数相匹配:结果:我们将美国各县分为 4 个谷歌流动性集群。人口流动性较高的聚类中,65 岁及以上人口比例较高,高中及大学以下学历的白人人口比例较高,大学以下学历人口比例较高,使用公共交通上班的人口比例较低,2016 年总统大选期间投票给克林顿的选民比例较低。此外,从 2020 年 11 月到 12 月,人口流动性较大的集群的人均 COVID-19 病例和死亡率急剧上升:具有某些人口特征的共和党倾向县的社会流动性增加较多,最终在 2020 年下半年 COVID-19 的发病率更为显著。
{"title":"Identifying the Socioeconomic, Demographic, and Political Determinants of Social Mobility and Their Effects on COVID-19 Cases and Deaths: Evidence From US Counties.","authors":"Niloofar Jalali, N Ken Tran, Anindya Sen, Plinio Pelegrini Morita","doi":"10.2196/31813","DOIUrl":"10.2196/31813","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The spread of COVID-19 at the local level is significantly impacted by population mobility. The U.S. has had extremely high per capita COVID-19 case and death rates. Efficient nonpharmaceutical interventions to control the spread of COVID-19 depend on our understanding of the determinants of public mobility.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study used publicly available Google data and machine learning to investigate population mobility across a sample of US counties. Statistical analysis was used to examine the socioeconomic, demographic, and political determinants of mobility and the corresponding patterns of per capita COVID-19 case and death rates.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Daily Google population mobility data for 1085 US counties from March 1 to December 31, 2020, were clustered based on differences in mobility patterns using K-means clustering methods. Social mobility indicators (retail, grocery and pharmacy, workplace, and residence) were compared across clusters. Statistical differences in socioeconomic, demographic, and political variables between clusters were explored to identify determinants of mobility. Clusters were matched with daily per capita COVID-19 cases and deaths.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Our results grouped US counties into 4 Google mobility clusters. Clusters with more population mobility had a higher percentage of the population aged 65 years and over, a greater population share of Whites with less than high school and college education, a larger percentage of the population with less than a college education, a lower percentage of the population using public transit to work, and a smaller share of voters who voted for Clinton during the 2016 presidential election. Furthermore, clusters with greater population mobility experienced a sharp increase in per capita COVID-19 case and death rates from November to December 2020.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Republican-leaning counties that are characterized by certain demographic characteristics had higher increases in social mobility and ultimately experienced a more significant incidence of COVID-19 during the latter part of 2020.</p>","PeriodicalId":73554,"journal":{"name":"JMIR infodemiology","volume":"2 1","pages":"e31813"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5,"publicationDate":"2022-03-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8900047/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"9704497","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Partisan Differences in Legislators' Discussion of Vaccination on Twitter During the COVID-19 Era: Natural Language Processing Analysis. COVID-19 时代立法者在 Twitter 上讨论疫苗接种的党派差异:自然语言处理分析。
IF 3.5 Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES Pub Date : 2022-02-18 eCollection Date: 2022-01-01 DOI: 10.2196/32372
Eden Engel-Rebitzer, Daniel C Stokes, Zachary F Meisel, Jonathan Purtle, Rebecca Doyle, Alison M Buttenheim

Background: The COVID-19 era has been characterized by the politicization of health-related topics. This is especially concerning given evidence that politicized discussion of vaccination may contribute to vaccine hesitancy. No research, however, has examined the content and politicization of legislator communication with the public about vaccination during the COVID-19 era.

Objective: The aim of this study was to examine vaccine-related tweets produced by state and federal legislators during the COVID-19 era to (1) describe the content of vaccine-related tweets; (2) examine the differences in vaccine-related tweet content between Democrats and Republicans; and (3) quantify (and describe trends over time in) partisan differences in vaccine-related communication.

Methods: We abstracted all vaccine-related tweets produced by state and federal legislators between February 01, 2020, and December 11, 2020. We used latent Dirichlet allocation to define the tweet topics and used descriptive statistics to describe differences by party in the use of topics and changes in political polarization over time.

Results: We included 14,519 tweets generated by 1463 state legislators and 521 federal legislators. Republicans were more likely to use words (eg, "record time," "launched," and "innovation") and topics (eg, Operation Warp Speed success) that were focused on the successful development of a SARS-CoV-2 vaccine. Democrats used a broader range of words (eg, "anti-vaxxers," "flu," and "free") and topics (eg, vaccine prioritization, influenza, and antivaxxers) that were more aligned with public health messaging related to the vaccine. Polarization increased over most of the study period.

Conclusions: Republican and Democratic legislators used different language in their Twitter conversations about vaccination during the COVID-19 era, leading to increased political polarization of vaccine-related tweets. These communication patterns have the potential to contribute to vaccine hesitancy.

背景:COVID-19 时代的特点是健康相关话题的政治化。有证据表明,对疫苗接种的政治化讨论可能会导致人们对疫苗接种犹豫不决,这一点尤其令人担忧。然而,还没有研究对 COVID-19 时代立法者就疫苗接种问题与公众沟通的内容和政治化程度进行研究:本研究旨在考察 COVID-19 时代州和联邦立法者发布的与疫苗相关的推文,以便:(1)描述与疫苗相关的推文内容;(2)考察民主党和共和党在与疫苗相关的推文内容上的差异;(3)量化(并描述)与疫苗相关的交流中的党派差异:我们摘录了州和联邦议员在 2020 年 2 月 1 日至 2020 年 12 月 11 日期间发布的所有与疫苗相关的推文。我们使用潜在的 Dirichlet 分配来定义推文主题,并使用描述性统计来描述各政党在使用主题方面的差异以及政治极化随时间的变化:我们收录了 1463 名州议员和 521 名联邦议员发布的 14519 条推文。共和党人更倾向于使用以成功研发 SARS-CoV-2 疫苗为主题的词语(如 "创纪录的时间"、"启动 "和 "创新")和话题(如 "经速行动的成功")。民主党人使用了更广泛的词汇(如 "反疫苗者"、"流感 "和 "免费")和话题(如疫苗优先化、流感和反疫苗者),这些词汇和话题更符合与疫苗相关的公共卫生信息。在研究期间的大部分时间里,两极分化加剧:结论:在 COVID-19 期间,共和党和民主党议员在推特上关于疫苗接种的对话中使用了不同的语言,导致疫苗相关推文的政治两极分化加剧。这些交流模式有可能导致疫苗接种犹豫不决。
{"title":"Partisan Differences in Legislators' Discussion of Vaccination on Twitter During the COVID-19 Era: Natural Language Processing Analysis.","authors":"Eden Engel-Rebitzer, Daniel C Stokes, Zachary F Meisel, Jonathan Purtle, Rebecca Doyle, Alison M Buttenheim","doi":"10.2196/32372","DOIUrl":"10.2196/32372","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The COVID-19 era has been characterized by the politicization of health-related topics. This is especially concerning given evidence that politicized discussion of vaccination may contribute to vaccine hesitancy. No research, however, has examined the content and politicization of legislator communication with the public about vaccination during the COVID-19 era.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>The aim of this study was to examine vaccine-related tweets produced by state and federal legislators during the COVID-19 era to (1) describe the content of vaccine-related tweets; (2) examine the differences in vaccine-related tweet content between Democrats and Republicans; and (3) quantify (and describe trends over time in) partisan differences in vaccine-related communication.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We abstracted all vaccine-related tweets produced by state and federal legislators between February 01, 2020, and December 11, 2020. We used latent Dirichlet allocation to define the tweet topics and used descriptive statistics to describe differences by party in the use of topics and changes in political polarization over time.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We included 14,519 tweets generated by 1463 state legislators and 521 federal legislators. Republicans were more likely to use words (eg, \"record time,\" \"launched,\" and \"innovation\") and topics (eg, Operation Warp Speed success) that were focused on the successful development of a SARS-CoV-2 vaccine. Democrats used a broader range of words (eg, \"anti-vaxxers,\" \"flu,\" and \"free\") and topics (eg, vaccine prioritization, influenza, and antivaxxers) that were more aligned with public health messaging related to the vaccine. Polarization increased over most of the study period.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Republican and Democratic legislators used different language in their Twitter conversations about vaccination during the COVID-19 era, leading to increased political polarization of vaccine-related tweets. These communication patterns have the potential to contribute to vaccine hesitancy.</p>","PeriodicalId":73554,"journal":{"name":"JMIR infodemiology","volume":"2 1","pages":"e32372"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5,"publicationDate":"2022-02-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8862742/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"9358807","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Media data and vaccine hesitancy: a scoping review (Preprint) 媒体数据与疫苗犹豫:范围界定综述(预印本)
Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES Pub Date : 2022-02-15 DOI: 10.2196/preprints.37300
J. Yin
BACKGROUND Media studies are important for vaccine hesitancy research since they analyze how media shapes risk perceptions and uptake of vaccines. Despite a growth in studies in this field due to advances in computing, language processing, and an expanding social media landscape, no study has consolidated the methodological approaches used to study vaccine hesitancy. Synthesizing this information can better structure and set a precedent for this growing subfield of digital epidemiology. OBJECTIVE The review aimed to identify and illustrate what media platforms and methods were used to study vaccine hesitancy, and how they build or contribute to the study of media’s influence on vaccine hesitancy and public health. METHODS This study followed PRISMA’s (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis) guidelines for scoping reviews. A search was done of PubMed, Web of Science, and SCOPUS for any studies that: used media data (social media and/or traditional media); had an outcome related to vaccine sentiment (opinion, uptake, hesitancy, acceptance, stance); were written in English; and published after 2010. Studies were screened by only one reviewer, and extracted for media platform, analysis method, and theoretical models used. RESULTS A total of 123 studies were included, 69 which used traditional research methods and 54 which used computational methods. Of the traditional methods, a majority used content analysis (74.2%) and sentiment analysis (37.1%) to analyze texts, with few using campaign evaluation methods (8.1%) and tracking of search activity and/or information spread (11.3%). The most common platform was newspapers, print media, and online news. Computational methods mostly used sentiment analysis (57.4%), topic modelling (31.5%), and network analysis (27.8%). Fewer studies used projections and feature extraction as methods. The most common platforms were Twitter and Facebook. Theoretically, most studies were weak. Of traditional methods, only 8 had a theory-based approach (11.6%); and for computational methods, only 6 (11.1%). Due to a patchwork of studies resulting from combinations of platforms and methods, it is difficult to draw a coherent conclusion on media’s influence on vaccine hesitancy. CONCLUSIONS There is heterogeneity in using media data to study vaccine hesitation, evidenced in the medley of combinations of platforms and computer science tools (eg. network analysis, sentiment analysis). Yet, these studies are guided by a preference for using novel methods rather than theory, making their links to public health tenuous. This review suggests and walks through a theory-first approach that can aid in better formulation of knowledge and establish a coherent paradigm in media studies on vaccine hesitancy. It ends with a statement that media data analyses, though groundbreaking in approach, should supplement–not supplant–current practices in public health research.
背景媒体研究对疫苗犹豫研究很重要,因为它们分析了媒体如何塑造风险认知和疫苗接种。尽管由于计算、语言处理和社交媒体领域的发展,该领域的研究有所增长,但没有任何研究巩固了用于研究疫苗犹豫的方法论方法。综合这些信息可以更好地构建数字流行病学这一不断发展的子领域,并为其开创先例。目的本综述旨在确定和说明哪些媒体平台和方法用于研究疫苗犹豫,以及它们如何建立或促进研究媒体对疫苗犹豫和公共卫生的影响。方法本研究遵循PRISMA(系统评价和荟萃分析的首选报告项目)的范围界定审查指南。在PubMed、Web of Science和SCOPUS上搜索任何研究:使用媒体数据(社交媒体和/或传统媒体);结果与疫苗情绪有关(意见、接受、犹豫、接受、立场);用英语书写;2010年后出版。研究仅由一名评审员进行筛选,并提取所使用的媒体平台、分析方法和理论模型。结果共纳入123项研究,其中69项采用传统研究方法,54项采用计算方法。在传统方法中,大多数使用内容分析(74.2%)和情绪分析(37.1%)来分析文本,很少使用活动评估方法(8.1%)和搜索活动和/或信息传播跟踪(11.3%)。最常见的平台是报纸、平面媒体和在线新闻。计算方法主要使用情感分析(57.4%)、主题建模(31.5%)和网络分析(27.8%)。使用投影和特征提取作为方法的研究较少。最常见的平台是Twitter和Facebook。理论上,大多数研究都很薄弱。在传统方法中,只有8种方法采用基于理论的方法(11.6%);在计算方法方面,只有6个(11.1%)。由于平台和方法的组合导致了拼凑的研究,很难就媒体对疫苗犹豫的影响得出一致的结论。结论使用媒体数据研究疫苗犹豫存在异质性,平台和计算机科学工具(如网络分析、情绪分析)的组合证明了这一点。然而,这些研究倾向于使用新颖的方法而不是理论,这使得它们与公共卫生的联系变得脆弱。这篇综述提出并实践了一种理论至上的方法,这种方法可以帮助更好地制定知识,并在媒体对疫苗犹豫的研究中建立一个连贯的范式。文章最后指出,媒体数据分析虽然在方法上具有开创性,但应补充而不是取代公共卫生研究中的现行做法。
{"title":"Media data and vaccine hesitancy: a scoping review (Preprint)","authors":"J. Yin","doi":"10.2196/preprints.37300","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2196/preprints.37300","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 BACKGROUND\u0000 Media studies are important for vaccine hesitancy research since they analyze how media shapes risk perceptions and uptake of vaccines. Despite a growth in studies in this field due to advances in computing, language processing, and an expanding social media landscape, no study has consolidated the methodological approaches used to study vaccine hesitancy. Synthesizing this information can better structure and set a precedent for this growing subfield of digital epidemiology.\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 OBJECTIVE\u0000 The review aimed to identify and illustrate what media platforms and methods were used to study vaccine hesitancy, and how they build or contribute to the study of media’s influence on vaccine hesitancy and public health.\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 METHODS\u0000 This study followed PRISMA’s (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis) guidelines for scoping reviews. A search was done of PubMed, Web of Science, and SCOPUS for any studies that: used media data (social media and/or traditional media); had an outcome related to vaccine sentiment (opinion, uptake, hesitancy, acceptance, stance); were written in English; and published after 2010. Studies were screened by only one reviewer, and extracted for media platform, analysis method, and theoretical models used.\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 RESULTS\u0000 A total of 123 studies were included, 69 which used traditional research methods and 54 which used computational methods. Of the traditional methods, a majority used content analysis (74.2%) and sentiment analysis (37.1%) to analyze texts, with few using campaign evaluation methods (8.1%) and tracking of search activity and/or information spread (11.3%). The most common platform was newspapers, print media, and online news. Computational methods mostly used sentiment analysis (57.4%), topic modelling (31.5%), and network analysis (27.8%). Fewer studies used projections and feature extraction as methods. The most common platforms were Twitter and Facebook. Theoretically, most studies were weak. Of traditional methods, only 8 had a theory-based approach (11.6%); and for computational methods, only 6 (11.1%). Due to a patchwork of studies resulting from combinations of platforms and methods, it is difficult to draw a coherent conclusion on media’s influence on vaccine hesitancy.\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 CONCLUSIONS\u0000 There is heterogeneity in using media data to study vaccine hesitation, evidenced in the medley of combinations of platforms and computer science tools (eg. network analysis, sentiment analysis). Yet, these studies are guided by a preference for using novel methods rather than theory, making their links to public health tenuous. This review suggests and walks through a theory-first approach that can aid in better formulation of knowledge and establish a coherent paradigm in media studies on vaccine hesitancy. It ends with a statement that media data analyses, though groundbreaking in approach, should supplement–not supplant–current practices in public health research.\u0000","PeriodicalId":73554,"journal":{"name":"JMIR infodemiology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-02-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46891027","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
COVID-19 and Tweets About Quitting Cigarette Smoking: Topic Model Analysis of Twitter Posts 2018-2020 新冠肺炎与戒烟推文:2018-2020年推文话题模型分析
Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES Pub Date : 2022-01-05 DOI: 10.2196/36215
J. Westmaas, M. Masters, Priti Bandi, Anuja Majmundar, S. Asare, W. Diver
Background The risk of infection and severity of illness by SARS-CoV-2 infection is elevated for people who smoke cigarettes and may motivate quitting. Organic public conversations on Twitter about quitting smoking could provide insight into quitting motivations or behaviors associated with the pandemic. Objective This study explored key topics of conversation about quitting cigarette smoking and examined their trajectory during 2018-2020. Methods Topic model analysis with latent Dirichlet allocation (LDA) identified themes in US tweets with the term “quit smoking.” The model was trained on posts from 2018 and was then applied to tweets posted in 2019 and 2020. Analysis of variance and follow-up pairwise tests were used to compare the daily frequency of tweets within and across years by quarter. Results The mean numbers of daily tweets on quitting smoking in 2018, 2019, and 2020 were 133 (SD 36.2), 145 (SD 69.4), and 127 (SD 32.6), respectively. Six topics were extracted: (1) need to quit, (2) personal experiences, (3) electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes), (4) advice/success, (5) quitting as a component of general health behavior change, and (6) clinics/services. Overall, the pandemic was not associated with changes in posts about quitting; instead, New Year’s resolutions and the 2019 e-cigarette or vaping use–associated lung injury (EVALI) epidemic were more plausible explanations for observed changes within and across years. Fewer second-quarter posts in 2020 for the topic e-cigarettes may reflect lower pandemic-related quitting interest, whereas fourth-quarter increases in 2020 for other topics pointed to a late-year upswing. Conclusions Twitter posts suggest that the pandemic did not generate greater interest in quitting smoking, but possibly a decrease in motivation when the rate of infections was increasing in the second quarter of 2020. Public health authorities may wish to craft messages for specific Twitter audiences (eg, using hashtags) to motivate quitting during pandemics.
背景吸烟的人感染严重急性呼吸系统综合征冠状病毒2型的风险和疾病严重程度会升高,并可能促使戒烟。推特上关于戒烟的有机公开对话可以深入了解与疫情相关的戒烟动机或行为。目的本研究探讨了2018-2020年关于戒烟的关键话题,并考察了其发展轨迹。方法采用潜在狄利克雷分配(LDA)的主题模型分析确定了美国推文中“戒烟”一词的主题。该模型在2018年的帖子上进行了训练,然后应用于2019年和2020年发布的推文。方差分析和后续成对测试用于逐季度比较年内和跨年推特的每日频率。结果2018年、2019年和2020年关于戒烟的平均每日推文数量分别为133条(SD 36.2)、145条(SD 69.4)和127条(SD 32.6)。提取了六个主题:(1)戒烟需求,(2)个人经历,(3)电子烟,(4)建议/成功,(5)戒烟是一般健康行为改变的一个组成部分,以及(6)诊所/服务。总的来说,新冠疫情与辞职帖子的变化无关;相反,新年决心和2019年电子烟或电子烟使用相关肺损伤(EVALI)流行是对多年内和多年间观察到的变化的更合理的解释。2020年第二季度电子烟主题的帖子减少可能反映出与疫情相关的戒烟兴趣降低,而2020年第四季度其他主题的帖子增加则表明年末有所上升。结论推特上的帖子表明,疫情并没有引起人们对戒烟的更大兴趣,但当2020年第二季度感染率上升时,戒烟动机可能会下降。公共卫生当局可能希望为特定的推特受众制作信息(例如,使用标签),以激励他们在疫情期间戒烟。
{"title":"COVID-19 and Tweets About Quitting Cigarette Smoking: Topic Model Analysis of Twitter Posts 2018-2020","authors":"J. Westmaas, M. Masters, Priti Bandi, Anuja Majmundar, S. Asare, W. Diver","doi":"10.2196/36215","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2196/36215","url":null,"abstract":"Background The risk of infection and severity of illness by SARS-CoV-2 infection is elevated for people who smoke cigarettes and may motivate quitting. Organic public conversations on Twitter about quitting smoking could provide insight into quitting motivations or behaviors associated with the pandemic. Objective This study explored key topics of conversation about quitting cigarette smoking and examined their trajectory during 2018-2020. Methods Topic model analysis with latent Dirichlet allocation (LDA) identified themes in US tweets with the term “quit smoking.” The model was trained on posts from 2018 and was then applied to tweets posted in 2019 and 2020. Analysis of variance and follow-up pairwise tests were used to compare the daily frequency of tweets within and across years by quarter. Results The mean numbers of daily tweets on quitting smoking in 2018, 2019, and 2020 were 133 (SD 36.2), 145 (SD 69.4), and 127 (SD 32.6), respectively. Six topics were extracted: (1) need to quit, (2) personal experiences, (3) electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes), (4) advice/success, (5) quitting as a component of general health behavior change, and (6) clinics/services. Overall, the pandemic was not associated with changes in posts about quitting; instead, New Year’s resolutions and the 2019 e-cigarette or vaping use–associated lung injury (EVALI) epidemic were more plausible explanations for observed changes within and across years. Fewer second-quarter posts in 2020 for the topic e-cigarettes may reflect lower pandemic-related quitting interest, whereas fourth-quarter increases in 2020 for other topics pointed to a late-year upswing. Conclusions Twitter posts suggest that the pandemic did not generate greater interest in quitting smoking, but possibly a decrease in motivation when the rate of infections was increasing in the second quarter of 2020. Public health authorities may wish to craft messages for specific Twitter audiences (eg, using hashtags) to motivate quitting during pandemics.","PeriodicalId":73554,"journal":{"name":"JMIR infodemiology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-01-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49263236","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
Constituents' Inferences of Local Governments' Goals and the Relationship Between Political Party and Belief in COVID-19 Misinformation: Cross-sectional Survey of Twitter Followers of State Public Health Departments. 选民对地方政府目标的推断以及政党与COVID-19错误信息信念的关系:对州公共卫生部门Twitter关注者的横断面调查
Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES Pub Date : 2022-01-01 DOI: 10.2196/29246
Hannah Stevens, Nicholas A Palomares
<p><strong>Background: </strong>Amid the COVID-19 pandemic, social media have influenced the circulation of health information. Public health agencies often use Twitter to disseminate and amplify the propagation of such information. Still, exposure to local government-endorsed COVID-19 public health information does not make one immune to believing misinformation. Moreover, not all health information on Twitter is accurate, and some users may believe misinformation and disinformation just as much as those who endorse more accurate information. This situation is complicated, given that elected officials may pursue a political agenda of re-election by downplaying the need for COVID-19 restrictions. The politically polarized nature of information and misinformation on social media in the United States has fueled a COVID-19 infodemic. Because pre-existing political beliefs can both facilitate and hinder persuasion, Twitter users' belief in COVID-19 misinformation is likely a function of their goal inferences about their local government agencies' motives for addressing the COVID-19 pandemic.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>We shed light on the cognitive processes of goal understanding that underlie the relationship between partisanship and belief in health misinformation. We investigate how the valence of Twitter users' goal inferences of local governments' COVID-19 efforts predicts their belief in COVID-19 misinformation as a function of their political party affiliation.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a web-based cross-sectional survey of US Twitter users who followed their state's official Department of Public Health Twitter account (n=258) between August 10 and December 23, 2020. Inferences about local governments' goals, demographics, and belief in COVID-19 misinformation were measured. State political affiliation was controlled.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Participants from all 50 states were included in the sample. An interaction emerged between political party affiliation and goal inference valence for belief in COVID-19 misinformation (∆<i>R</i> <sup>2</sup>=0.04; <i>F</i> <sub>8,249</sub>=4.78; <i>P</i><.001); positive goal inference valence predicted increased belief in COVID-19 misinformation among Republicans (β=.47; <i>t</i> <sub>249</sub>=2.59; <i>P</i>=.01) but not among Democrats (β=.07; <i>t</i> <sub>249</sub>=0.84; <i>P</i>=.40).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Our results reveal that favorable inferences about local governments' COVID-19 efforts can accelerate belief in misinformation among Republican-identifying constituents. In other words, accurate COVID-19 transmission knowledge is a function of constituents' sentiment toward politicians rather than science, which has significant implications on public health efforts for minimizing the spread of the disease, as convincing misinformed constituents to practice safety measures might be a political issue just as much as it is a health one. Our work suggests
背景:在2019冠状病毒病大流行期间,社交媒体影响了卫生信息的传播。公共卫生机构经常使用Twitter来传播和扩大这类信息的传播。尽管如此,接触当地政府批准的COVID-19公共卫生信息并不能使人们免于相信错误信息。此外,并不是Twitter上所有的健康信息都是准确的,一些用户可能会相信错误信息和虚假信息,就像那些认可更准确信息的人一样。鉴于当选官员可能通过淡化COVID-19限制的必要性来追求连任的政治议程,这种情况很复杂。美国社交媒体上信息的政治两极化和错误信息助长了新冠肺炎的信息大流行。由于预先存在的政治信仰既可以促进也可以阻碍说服,推特用户对COVID-19错误信息的信念可能是他们对当地政府机构应对COVID-19大流行动机的目标推断的功能。目的:我们揭示了目标理解的认知过程,这是党派关系与健康错误信息信念之间关系的基础。我们调查了推特用户对地方政府COVID-19努力的目标推断的效价如何预测他们对COVID-19错误信息的信念,作为其政党关系的函数。方法:我们对2020年8月10日至12月23日期间关注其州公共卫生部官方Twitter账户的美国Twitter用户(n=258)进行了一项基于网络的横断面调查。对地方政府的目标、人口统计数据和对COVID-19错误信息的信念进行了衡量。国家政治派别受到控制。结果:来自所有50个州的参与者都包括在样本中。政党归属与新冠肺炎错误信息信念的目标推断效价之间存在交互作用(∆r2 =0.04;F 8249 = 4.78;Pt 249 = 2.59;P=.01),但民主党人中没有(β=.07;t 249 = 0.84;P = .40)。结论:我们的研究结果表明,对地方政府COVID-19工作的有利推断可以加速共和党识别选民对错误信息的信念。换句话说,准确的COVID-19传播知识是选民对政治家的情绪而不是科学的功能,这对最大限度地减少疾病传播的公共卫生努力具有重大影响,因为说服被误导的选民采取安全措施可能是一个政治问题,就像它是一个健康问题一样。我们的工作表明,目标理解过程对于共和党人关于COVID-19的错误信息很重要。那些负责未来COVID-19公共卫生信息传递的人,旨在提高对COVID-19有效信息的信任,应认识到有必要测试针对党派先前存在的政治观点的有说服力的呼吁,以防止个人的目标推断干扰公共卫生信息传递。
{"title":"Constituents' Inferences of Local Governments' Goals and the Relationship Between Political Party and Belief in COVID-19 Misinformation: Cross-sectional Survey of Twitter Followers of State Public Health Departments.","authors":"Hannah Stevens,&nbsp;Nicholas A Palomares","doi":"10.2196/29246","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2196/29246","url":null,"abstract":"&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Background: &lt;/strong&gt;Amid the COVID-19 pandemic, social media have influenced the circulation of health information. Public health agencies often use Twitter to disseminate and amplify the propagation of such information. Still, exposure to local government-endorsed COVID-19 public health information does not make one immune to believing misinformation. Moreover, not all health information on Twitter is accurate, and some users may believe misinformation and disinformation just as much as those who endorse more accurate information. This situation is complicated, given that elected officials may pursue a political agenda of re-election by downplaying the need for COVID-19 restrictions. The politically polarized nature of information and misinformation on social media in the United States has fueled a COVID-19 infodemic. Because pre-existing political beliefs can both facilitate and hinder persuasion, Twitter users' belief in COVID-19 misinformation is likely a function of their goal inferences about their local government agencies' motives for addressing the COVID-19 pandemic.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Objective: &lt;/strong&gt;We shed light on the cognitive processes of goal understanding that underlie the relationship between partisanship and belief in health misinformation. We investigate how the valence of Twitter users' goal inferences of local governments' COVID-19 efforts predicts their belief in COVID-19 misinformation as a function of their political party affiliation.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Methods: &lt;/strong&gt;We conducted a web-based cross-sectional survey of US Twitter users who followed their state's official Department of Public Health Twitter account (n=258) between August 10 and December 23, 2020. Inferences about local governments' goals, demographics, and belief in COVID-19 misinformation were measured. State political affiliation was controlled.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Results: &lt;/strong&gt;Participants from all 50 states were included in the sample. An interaction emerged between political party affiliation and goal inference valence for belief in COVID-19 misinformation (∆&lt;i&gt;R&lt;/i&gt; &lt;sup&gt;2&lt;/sup&gt;=0.04; &lt;i&gt;F&lt;/i&gt; &lt;sub&gt;8,249&lt;/sub&gt;=4.78; &lt;i&gt;P&lt;/i&gt;&lt;.001); positive goal inference valence predicted increased belief in COVID-19 misinformation among Republicans (β=.47; &lt;i&gt;t&lt;/i&gt; &lt;sub&gt;249&lt;/sub&gt;=2.59; &lt;i&gt;P&lt;/i&gt;=.01) but not among Democrats (β=.07; &lt;i&gt;t&lt;/i&gt; &lt;sub&gt;249&lt;/sub&gt;=0.84; &lt;i&gt;P&lt;/i&gt;=.40).&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Conclusions: &lt;/strong&gt;Our results reveal that favorable inferences about local governments' COVID-19 efforts can accelerate belief in misinformation among Republican-identifying constituents. In other words, accurate COVID-19 transmission knowledge is a function of constituents' sentiment toward politicians rather than science, which has significant implications on public health efforts for minimizing the spread of the disease, as convincing misinformed constituents to practice safety measures might be a political issue just as much as it is a health one. Our work suggests","PeriodicalId":73554,"journal":{"name":"JMIR infodemiology","volume":"2 1","pages":"e29246"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10014089/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"9363936","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4
Factors Affecting Physicians' Credibility on Twitter When Sharing Health Information: Online Experimental Study. 影响医生在Twitter上分享健康信息时可信度的因素:在线实验研究。
Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES Pub Date : 2022-01-01 DOI: 10.2196/34525
DaJuan Ferrell, Celeste Campos-Castillo

Background: Largely absent from research on how users appraise the credibility of professionals as sources for the information they find on social media is work investigating factors shaping credibility within a specific profession, such as physicians.

Objective: We address debates about how physicians can show their credibility on social media depending on whether they employ a formal or casual appearance in their profile picture. Using prominence-interpretation theory, we posit that formal appearance will affect perceived credibility based on users' social context-specifically, whether they have a regular health care provider.

Methods: For this experiment, we recruited 205 social media users using Amazon Mechanical Turk. We asked participants if they had a regular health care provider and then randomly assigned them to read 1 of 3 Twitter posts that varied only in the profile picture of the physician offering health advice. Next, we tasked participants with assessing the credibility of the physician and their likelihood of engaging with the tweet and the physician on Twitter. We used path analysis to assess whether participants having a regular health care provider impacted how the profile picture affected their ratings of the physician's credibility and their likelihood to engage with the tweet and physician on Twitter.

Results: We found that the profile picture of a physician posting health advice in either formal or casual attire did not elicit significant differences in credibility, with ratings comparable to those having no profile image. Among participants assigned the formal appearance condition, those with a regular provider rated the physician higher on a credibility than those without, which led to stronger intentions to engage with the tweet and physician.

Conclusions: The findings add to existing research by showing how the social context of information seeking on social media shapes the credibility of a given professional. Practical implications for professionals engaging with the public on social media and combating false information include moving past debates about casual versus formal appearances and toward identifying ways to segment audiences based on factors like their backgrounds (eg, experiences with health care providers).

背景:关于用户如何评价专业人士作为他们在社交媒体上找到的信息来源的可信度的研究,在很大程度上缺乏调查特定职业(如医生)中影响可信度的因素的工作。目的:我们讨论了医生如何在社交媒体上展示他们的可信度,这取决于他们在个人资料照片中是使用正式的还是随意的外观。使用突出解释理论,我们假设正式的外表会影响基于用户社会背景的感知可信度,特别是他们是否有定期的医疗保健提供者。方法:在本实验中,我们使用Amazon Mechanical Turk招募了205名社交媒体用户。我们询问参与者是否有固定的医疗服务提供者,然后随机分配他们阅读3个Twitter帖子中的1个,这些帖子只有提供健康建议的医生的头像不同。接下来,我们让参与者评估医生的可信度,以及他们在推特上与推特和医生互动的可能性。我们使用路径分析来评估拥有常规医疗服务提供者的参与者是否会影响个人资料图片如何影响他们对医生可信度的评级以及他们在Twitter上与推文和医生互动的可能性。结果:我们发现,无论是穿着正装还是休闲装的医生发布健康建议的头像,其可信度都没有显著差异,其评分与没有头像的医生相当。在指定了正式外表条件的参与者中,那些有固定医疗服务提供者的人对医生的可信度的评价高于那些没有医疗服务提供者的人,这导致他们更愿意与推特和医生互动。结论:这些发现为现有的研究提供了补充,表明了在社交媒体上寻求信息的社会背景如何塑造了特定专业人士的可信度。对于在社交媒体上与公众接触并打击虚假信息的专业人士来说,这一做法的实际意义包括:改变过去关于非正式与正式着装的争论,转而根据背景等因素(例如,与医疗服务提供者的接触经历)确定对受众进行细分的方法。
{"title":"Factors Affecting Physicians' Credibility on Twitter When Sharing Health Information: Online Experimental Study.","authors":"DaJuan Ferrell,&nbsp;Celeste Campos-Castillo","doi":"10.2196/34525","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2196/34525","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Largely absent from research on how users appraise the credibility of professionals as sources for the information they find on social media is work investigating factors shaping credibility within a specific profession, such as physicians.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>We address debates about how physicians can show their credibility on social media depending on whether they employ a formal or casual appearance in their profile picture. Using prominence-interpretation theory, we posit that formal appearance will affect perceived credibility based on users' social context-specifically, whether they have a regular health care provider.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>For this experiment, we recruited 205 social media users using Amazon Mechanical Turk. We asked participants if they had a regular health care provider and then randomly assigned them to read 1 of 3 Twitter posts that varied only in the profile picture of the physician offering health advice. Next, we tasked participants with assessing the credibility of the physician and their likelihood of engaging with the tweet and the physician on Twitter. We used path analysis to assess whether participants having a regular health care provider impacted how the profile picture affected their ratings of the physician's credibility and their likelihood to engage with the tweet and physician on Twitter.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We found that the profile picture of a physician posting health advice in either formal or casual attire did not elicit significant differences in credibility, with ratings comparable to those having no profile image. Among participants assigned the formal appearance condition, those with a regular provider rated the physician higher on a credibility than those without, which led to stronger intentions to engage with the tweet and physician.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The findings add to existing research by showing how the social context of information seeking on social media shapes the credibility of a given professional. Practical implications for professionals engaging with the public on social media and combating false information include moving past debates about casual versus formal appearances and toward identifying ways to segment audiences based on factors like their backgrounds (eg, experiences with health care providers).</p>","PeriodicalId":73554,"journal":{"name":"JMIR infodemiology","volume":"2 1","pages":"e34525"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9987183/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"9369312","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
Themes Surrounding COVID-19 and Its Infodemic: Qualitative Analysis of the COVID-19 Discussion on the Multidisciplinary Healthcare Information for All Health Forum. 围绕COVID-19及其信息大流行的主题:多学科卫生保健信息全民健康论坛上关于COVID-19讨论的定性分析。
Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES Pub Date : 2022-01-01 DOI: 10.2196/30167
Rakshith Gangireddy, Stuti Chakraborty, Neil Pakenham-Walsh, Branavan Nagarajan, Prerna Krishan, Richard McGuire, Gladson Vaghela, Abi Sriharan

Background: Healthcare Information for All (HIFA) is a multidisciplinary global campaign consisting of more than 20,000 members worldwide committed to improving the availability and use of health care information in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). During the COVID-19 pandemic, online HIFA forums saw a tremendous amount of discussion regarding the lack of information about COVID-19, the spread of misinformation, and the pandemic's impact on different communities.

Objective: This study aims to analyze the themes and perspectives shared in the COVID-19 discussion on English HIFA forums.

Methods: Over a period of 8 months, a qualitative thematic content analysis of the COVID-19 discussion on English HIFA forums was conducted. In total, 865 posts between January 24 and October 31, 2020, from 246 unique study participants were included and analyzed.

Results: In total, 6 major themes were identified: infodemic, health system, digital health literacy, economic consequences, marginalized peoples, and mental health. The geographical distribution of study participants involved in the discussion spanned across 46 different countries in every continent except Antarctica. Study participants' professions included public health workers, health care providers, and researchers, among others. Study participants' affiliation included nongovernment organizations (NGOs), commercial organizations, academic institutions, the United Nations (UN), the World Health Organization (WHO), and others.

Conclusions: The themes that emerged from this analysis highlight personal recounts, reflections, suggestions, and evidence around addressing COVID-19 related misinformation and might also help to understand the timeline of information evolution, focus, and needs surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic.

背景:全民医疗保健信息(HIFA)是一个多学科的全球运动,由全球超过20,000名成员组成,致力于改善低收入和中等收入国家(LMICs)医疗保健信息的可用性和使用。在2019冠状病毒病大流行期间,HIFA在线论坛就COVID-19信息缺乏、错误信息传播以及疫情对不同社区的影响等问题进行了大量讨论。目的:本研究旨在分析英语HIFA论坛上关于COVID-19讨论的主题和观点。方法:在8个月的时间里,对HIFA英语论坛上关于COVID-19的讨论进行定性专题内容分析。总共包括并分析了2020年1月24日至10月31日期间来自246个独特研究参与者的865条帖子。结果:共确定了6个主要主题:信息流行、卫生系统、数字卫生素养、经济后果、边缘化人群和心理健康。参与讨论的研究参与者的地理分布跨越了除南极洲以外的各大洲的46个不同国家。研究参与者的职业包括公共卫生工作者、卫生保健提供者和研究人员等。研究参与者包括非政府组织(ngo)、商业组织、学术机构、联合国(UN)、世界卫生组织(WHO)等。结论:本分析得出的主题突出了关于解决COVID-19相关错误信息的个人叙述、反思、建议和证据,也可能有助于了解COVID-19大流行的信息演变、重点和需求的时间表。
{"title":"Themes Surrounding COVID-19 and Its Infodemic: Qualitative Analysis of the COVID-19 Discussion on the Multidisciplinary Healthcare Information for All Health Forum.","authors":"Rakshith Gangireddy,&nbsp;Stuti Chakraborty,&nbsp;Neil Pakenham-Walsh,&nbsp;Branavan Nagarajan,&nbsp;Prerna Krishan,&nbsp;Richard McGuire,&nbsp;Gladson Vaghela,&nbsp;Abi Sriharan","doi":"10.2196/30167","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2196/30167","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Healthcare Information for All (HIFA) is a multidisciplinary global campaign consisting of more than 20,000 members worldwide committed to improving the availability and use of health care information in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). During the COVID-19 pandemic, online HIFA forums saw a tremendous amount of discussion regarding the lack of information about COVID-19, the spread of misinformation, and the pandemic's impact on different communities.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study aims to analyze the themes and perspectives shared in the COVID-19 discussion on English HIFA forums.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Over a period of 8 months, a qualitative thematic content analysis of the COVID-19 discussion on English HIFA forums was conducted. In total, 865 posts between January 24 and October 31, 2020, from 246 unique study participants were included and analyzed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In total, 6 major themes were identified: infodemic, health system, digital health literacy, economic consequences, marginalized peoples, and mental health. The geographical distribution of study participants involved in the discussion spanned across 46 different countries in every continent except Antarctica. Study participants' professions included public health workers, health care providers, and researchers, among others. Study participants' affiliation included nongovernment organizations (NGOs), commercial organizations, academic institutions, the United Nations (UN), the World Health Organization (WHO), and others.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The themes that emerged from this analysis highlight personal recounts, reflections, suggestions, and evidence around addressing COVID-19 related misinformation and might also help to understand the timeline of information evolution, focus, and needs surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic.</p>","PeriodicalId":73554,"journal":{"name":"JMIR infodemiology","volume":"2 1","pages":"e30167"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9100310/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"9349982","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
期刊
JMIR infodemiology
全部 Acc. Chem. Res. ACS Applied Bio Materials ACS Appl. Electron. Mater. ACS Appl. Energy Mater. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces ACS Appl. Nano Mater. ACS Appl. Polym. Mater. ACS BIOMATER-SCI ENG ACS Catal. ACS Cent. Sci. ACS Chem. Biol. ACS Chemical Health & Safety ACS Chem. Neurosci. ACS Comb. Sci. ACS Earth Space Chem. ACS Energy Lett. ACS Infect. Dis. ACS Macro Lett. ACS Mater. Lett. ACS Med. Chem. Lett. ACS Nano ACS Omega ACS Photonics ACS Sens. ACS Sustainable Chem. Eng. ACS Synth. Biol. Anal. Chem. BIOCHEMISTRY-US Bioconjugate Chem. BIOMACROMOLECULES Chem. Res. Toxicol. Chem. Rev. Chem. Mater. CRYST GROWTH DES ENERG FUEL Environ. Sci. Technol. Environ. Sci. Technol. Lett. Eur. J. Inorg. Chem. IND ENG CHEM RES Inorg. Chem. J. Agric. Food. Chem. J. Chem. Eng. Data J. Chem. Educ. J. Chem. Inf. Model. J. Chem. Theory Comput. J. Med. Chem. J. Nat. Prod. J PROTEOME RES J. Am. Chem. Soc. LANGMUIR MACROMOLECULES Mol. Pharmaceutics Nano Lett. Org. Lett. ORG PROCESS RES DEV ORGANOMETALLICS J. Org. Chem. J. Phys. Chem. J. Phys. Chem. A J. Phys. Chem. B J. Phys. Chem. C J. Phys. Chem. Lett. Analyst Anal. Methods Biomater. Sci. Catal. Sci. Technol. Chem. Commun. Chem. Soc. Rev. CHEM EDUC RES PRACT CRYSTENGCOMM Dalton Trans. Energy Environ. Sci. ENVIRON SCI-NANO ENVIRON SCI-PROC IMP ENVIRON SCI-WAT RES Faraday Discuss. Food Funct. Green Chem. Inorg. Chem. Front. Integr. Biol. J. Anal. At. Spectrom. J. Mater. Chem. A J. Mater. Chem. B J. Mater. Chem. C Lab Chip Mater. Chem. Front. Mater. Horiz. MEDCHEMCOMM Metallomics Mol. Biosyst. Mol. Syst. Des. Eng. Nanoscale Nanoscale Horiz. Nat. Prod. Rep. New J. Chem. Org. Biomol. Chem. Org. Chem. Front. PHOTOCH PHOTOBIO SCI PCCP Polym. Chem.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
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
×
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
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
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