Analysis of tweets discussing the risk of Mpox among children and young people in school (May-Oct 2022): Public health experts on Twitter consistently exaggerated risks and infrequently reported accurate information
Knudsen, B.; Hoeg, T. B.; Prasad, V.
Show abstract
ImportanceTwitter is used by health professionals to relay information. We sought to investigate the use of tweets to describe Mpox risks to children and young people in school during summer/ fall of 2022. ObjectiveTo determine the number of tweets discussing the risk of Mpox to children and young people in school and 1) determine accuracy, 2) for inaccurate tweets, determine if risk was minimized or exaggerated and 3) describe the characteristics of the accounts and tweets which contained accurate vs. inaccurate information. DesignRetrospective observational study. SettingTwitter advanced search in January 2023 of tweets spanning May 18th, 2022, to September 19th, 2022. ParticipantsAccounts labeled as: MD, DO, nurse, pharmacist, physical therapist, other health care provider, PhD, MPH, other Ed. degree, JD, health/medicine/public policy reporter (including students or candidates) who tweeted about the risk of Mpox to children and young people in school. ExposuresTweets containing the keywords school and mpox, pox, or monkeypox from May to October 2022. MeasuresThe primary outcome was the total of and ratio of accurate vs inaccurate tweets, the latter further subdivided by exaggerating or minimizing risk, and stratified by account author credential type. Secondary outcomes included total likes, retweets and follower counts by accurate vs inaccurate tweets, by month and account credentials. Finally, Twitter user exposure to inaccurate vs accurate Mpox tweets was estimated. Results262 tweets were identified. 215/262 (82%) were inaccurate and 215/215 (100%) of these exaggerated risks. 47/262 (18%) tweets were accurate. There were 163 (87%) unique authors of inaccurate tweets and 25 (13%) of accurate tweets. Among health care professionals, 86% (95/111) of tweets were inaccurate. Only health reporters, (23/41) 56% of tweets, were more likely to provide accurate information, however this was driven by one reporter. Multiplying accuracy by followers and retweets, Twitter users were approximately 974x more likely to encounter inaccurate than accurate information. ConclusionCredentialed Twitter users were 4.6 times more likely to tweet inaccurate than accurate messages. We also demonstrated how incorrect tweets can be quickly amplified by retweets and popular accounts. In the case of Mpox in children and young people, incorrect information exaggerated the risks 100% of the time. Key PointsO_ST_ABSQuestionC_ST_ABSWere tweets during the summer/ fall of 2022 that discussed the risk of Mpox to children and young people in school more likely to be inaccurate or accurate? FindingsCredentialed Twitter users discussing the risk of Mpox to children and young people in schools were 4.6 times more likely to tweet inaccurate than accurate messages. 215/262 (82%) tweets were inaccurate and 215/215 (100%) of these exaggerated risks. 47/262 (18%) were accurate. MeaningTwitter users were more often exposed to inaccurate than accurate information about the risk of Mpox to children and young people in school.
Matching journals
The top 11 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- The use of social media platforms by migrant and ethnic minority populations during the COVID-19 pandemic: a systematic review 92%
- Online information on face masks in Italian and English websites: deficiencies and responsibilities of search engines 92%
- Economic and social impacts of COVID-19 and public health measures: results from an anonymous online survey in Thailand, Malaysia, the United Kingdom, Italy and Slovenia 91%
Similar papers in this journal
- Use of machine learning methods to understand discussions of female genital mutilation/cutting on social media 95%
- Intimate partner violence and its correlates in middle-aged and older adults during the COVID-19 pandemic: A multi-country secondary analysis 91%
- Architecture of systems affecting disease trajectories in a conflict zone: A community-centered systems inquiry in North Gaza 91%
Similar papers in this journal
- Effects of a multimedia campaign on HIV self-testing and PrEP outcomes among young people in South Africa: A mixed-methods impact evaluation of ‘MTV Shuga Down South’ 92%
- Following the science? Views from scientists on government advisory boards during the COVID-19 pandemic: a qualitative interview study in five European countries 91%
- Public engagement and crowdfunding for health research: A global qualitative evidence synthesis and TDR pilot 91%
Similar papers in this journal
- Natural language processing to evaluate texting conversations between patients and healthcare providers during COVID-19 Home-Based Care in Rwanda at scale 92%
- Which social media platforms facilitate monitoring the opioid crisis? 92%
- A proposed de-identification framework for a cohort of children presenting at a health facility in Uganda 92%
Similar papers in this journal
- Key topics in pandemic health risk communication: A qualitative study of expert opinions and knowledge 93%
- Towards a COVID-19 symptom triad: The importance of symptom constellations in the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic 92%
- The Pandemic Journaling Project: A new dataset of first-person accounts of the COVID-19 pandemic 92%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.