Opportunities for Artificial Intelligence–Enabled Social Media Analysis of Public Attitudes Toward Covid-19 Vaccines
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Hussain A
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7864479 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Feb
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundThe emergence of SARS-CoV-2 in late 2019 and its subsequent spread worldwide continues to be a global health crisis. Many governments consider contact tracing of citizens through apps installed on mobile phones as a key mechanism to contain the spread of SARS-CoV-2.ObjectiveIn this study, we sought to explore the suitability of artificial intelligence (AI)-enabled social media analyses using Facebook and Twitter to understand public perceptions of COVID-19 contact tracing apps in the United Kingdom.MethodsWe extracted and analyzed over 10,000 relevant social media posts across an 8-month period, from March 1 to October 31, 2020. We used an initial filter with COVID-19-related keywords, which were predefined as part of an open Twitter-based COVID-19 dataset. We then applied a second filter using contract tracing app-related keywords and a geographical filter. We developed and utilized a hybrid, rule-based ensemble model, combining state-of-the-art lexicon rule-based and deep learning-based approaches.ResultsOverall, we observed 76% positive and 12% negative sentiments, with the majority of negative sentiments reported in the North of England. These sentiments varied over time, likely influenced by ongoing public debates around implementing app-based contact tracing by using a centralized model where data would be shared with the health service, compared with decentralized contact-tracing technology.ConclusionsVariations in sentiments corroborate with ongoing debates surrounding the information governance of health-related information. AI-enabled social media analysis of public attitudes in health care can help facilitate the implementation of effective public health campaigns.
| S-EPMC8130818 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundGlobal efforts toward the development and deployment of a vaccine for COVID-19 are rapidly advancing. To achieve herd immunity, widespread administration of vaccines is required, which necessitates significant cooperation from the general public. As such, it is crucial that governments and public health agencies understand public sentiments toward vaccines, which can help guide educational campaigns and other targeted policy interventions.ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to develop and apply an artificial intelligence-based approach to analyze public sentiments on social media in the United Kingdom and the United States toward COVID-19 vaccines to better understand the public attitude and concerns regarding COVID-19 vaccines.MethodsOver 300,000 social media posts related to COVID-19 vaccines were extracted, including 23,571 Facebook posts from the United Kingdom and 144,864 from the United States, along with 40,268 tweets from the United Kingdom and 98,385 from the United States from March 1 to November 22, 2020. We used natural language processing and deep learning-based techniques to predict average sentiments, sentiment trends, and topics of discussion. These factors were analyzed longitudinally and geospatially, and manual reading of randomly selected posts on points of interest helped identify underlying themes and validated insights from the analysis.ResultsOverall averaged positive, negative, and neutral sentiments were at 58%, 22%, and 17% in the United Kingdom, compared to 56%, 24%, and 18% in the United States, respectively. Public optimism over vaccine development, effectiveness, and trials as well as concerns over their safety, economic viability, and corporation control were identified. We compared our findings to those of nationwide surveys in both countries and found them to correlate broadly.ConclusionsArtificial intelligence-enabled social media analysis should be considered for adoption by institutions and governments alongside surveys and other conventional methods of assessing public attitude. Such analyses could enable real-time assessment, at scale, of public confidence and trust in COVID-19 vaccines, help address the concerns of vaccine sceptics, and help develop more effective policies and communication strategies to maximize uptake.
| S-EPMC8023383 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceDespite compelling evidence that statins are safe, are generally well tolerated, and reduce cardiovascular events, statins are underused even in patients with the highest risk. Social media may provide contemporary insights into public perceptions about statins.ObjectiveTo characterize and classify public perceptions about statins that were gleaned from more than a decade of statin-related discussions on Reddit, a widely used social media platform.Design, setting, and participantsThis qualitative study analyzed all statin-related discussions on the social media platform that were dated between January 1, 2009, and July 12, 2022. Statin- and cholesterol-focused communities, were identified to create a list of statin-related discussions. An artificial intelligence (AI) pipeline was developed to cluster these discussions into specific topics and overarching thematic groups. The pipeline consisted of a semisupervised natural language processing model (BERT [Bidirectional Encoder Representations from Transformers]), a dimensionality reduction technique, and a clustering algorithm. The sentiment for each discussion was labeled as positive, neutral, or negative using a pretrained BERT model.ExposuresStatin-related posts and comments containing the terms statin and cholesterol.Main outcomes and measuresStatin-related topics and thematic groups.ResultsA total of 10 233 unique statin-related discussions (961 posts and 9272 comments) from 5188 unique authors were identified. The number of statin-related discussions increased by a mean (SD) of 32.9% (41.1%) per year. A total of 100 discussion topics were identified and were classified into 6 overarching thematic groups: (1) ketogenic diets, diabetes, supplements, and statins; (2) statin adverse effects; (3) statin hesitancy; (4) clinical trial appraisals; (5) pharmaceutical industry bias and statins; and (6) red yeast rice and statins. The sentiment analysis revealed that most discussions had a neutral (66.6%) or negative (30.8%) sentiment.Conclusions and relevanceResults of this study demonstrated the potential of an AI approach to analyze large, contemporary, publicly available social media data and generate insights into public perceptions about statins. This information may help guide strategies for addressing barriers to statin use and adherence.
| S-EPMC10126874 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:High-quality medical resources are in high demand worldwide, and the application of artificial intelligence (AI) in medical care may help alleviate the crisis related to this shortage. The development of the medical AI industry depends to a certain extent on whether industry experts have a comprehensive understanding of the public's views on medical AI. Currently, the opinions of the general public on this matter remain unclear. OBJECTIVE:The purpose of this study is to explore the public perception of AI in medical care through a content analysis of social media data, including specific topics that the public is concerned about; public attitudes toward AI in medical care and the reasons for them; and public opinion on whether AI can replace human doctors. METHODS:Through an application programming interface, we collected a data set from the Sina Weibo platform comprising more than 16 million users throughout China by crawling all public posts from January to December 2017. Based on this data set, we identified 2315 posts related to AI in medical care and classified them through content analysis. RESULTS:Among the 2315 identified posts, we found three types of AI topics discussed on the platform: (1) technology and application (n=987, 42.63%), (2) industry development (n=706, 30.50%), and (3) impact on society (n=622, 26.87%). Out of 956 posts where public attitudes were expressed, 59.4% (n=568), 34.4% (n=329), and 6.2% (n=59) of the posts expressed positive, neutral, and negative attitudes, respectively. The immaturity of AI technology (27/59, 46%) and a distrust of related companies (n=15, 25%) were the two main reasons for the negative attitudes. Across 200 posts that mentioned public attitudes toward replacing human doctors with AI, 47.5% (n=95) and 32.5% (n=65) of the posts expressed that AI would completely or partially replace human doctors, respectively. In comparison, 20.0% (n=40) of the posts expressed that AI would not replace human doctors. CONCLUSIONS:Our findings indicate that people are most concerned about AI technology and applications. Generally, the majority of people held positive attitudes and believed that AI doctors would completely or partially replace human ones. Compared with previous studies on medical doctors, the general public has a more positive attitude toward medical AI. Lack of trust in AI and the absence of the humanistic care factor are essential reasons why some people still have a negative attitude toward medical AI. We suggest that practitioners may need to pay more attention to promoting the credibility of technology companies and meeting patients' emotional needs instead of focusing merely on technical issues.
| S-EPMC7385634 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Coronary artery calcium (CAC) is a powerful tool to refine atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) risk assessment. Despite its growing interest, contemporary public attitudes around CAC are not well-described in literature and have important implications for shared decision-making around cardiovascular prevention. We used an artificial intelligence (AI) pipeline consisting of a semi-supervised natural language processing model and unsupervised machine learning techniques to analyze 5,606 CAC-related discussions on Reddit. A total of 91 discussion topics were identified and were classified into 14 overarching thematic groups. These included the strong impact of CAC on therapeutic decision-making, ongoing non-evidence-based use of CAC testing, and the patient perceived downsides of CAC testing (e.g., radiation risk). Sentiment analysis also revealed that most discussions had a neutral (49.5%) or negative (48.4%) sentiment. The results of this study demonstrate the potential of an AI-based approach to analyze large, publicly available social media data to generate insights into public perceptions about CAC, which may help guide strategies to improve shared decision-making around ASCVD management and public health interventions.
| S-EPMC10981728 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background: Artificial intelligence (AI) has recently surfaced as a research topic in dermatology and dermatopathology. In a recent survey, dermatologists were overall positive toward a development with an increased use of AI, but little is known about the corresponding attitudes among pathologists working with dermatopathology. The objective of this investigation was to make an inventory of these attitudes. Participants and Methods: An anonymous and voluntary online survey was prepared and distributed to pathologists who regularly analyzed dermatopathology slides/images. The survey consisted of 39 question divided in five sections; (1) AI as a topic in pathology; (2) previous exposure to AI as a topic in general; (3) applications for AI in dermatopathology; (4) feelings and attitudes toward AI and (5) self-reported tech-savviness and demographics. The survey opened on March 13, 2020 and closed on May 5, 2020. Results: Overall, 718 responders (64.1% females) representing 91 countries were analyzed. While 81.5% of responders were aware of AI as an emerging topic in pathology, only 18.8% had either good or excellent knowledge about AI. In terms of diagnosis classification, 42.6% saw strong or very strong potential for automated suggestion of skin tumor diagnoses. The corresponding figure for inflammatory skin diseases was 23.0% (Padj < 0.0001). For specific applications, the highest potential was considered for automated detection of mitosis (79.2%), automated suggestion of tumor margins (62.1%) and immunostaining evaluation (62.7%). The potential for automated suggestion of immunostaining (37.6%) and genetic panels (48.3%) were lower. Age did not impact the overall attitudes toward AI. Only 6.0% of the responders agreed or strongly agreed that the human pathologist will be replaced by AI in the foreseeable future. For the entire group, 72.3% agreed or strongly agreed that AI will improve dermatopathology and 84.1% thought that AI should be a part of medical training. Conclusions: Pathologists are generally optimistic about the impact and potential benefit of AI in dermatopathology. The highest potential is expected for narrow specified tasks rather than a global automated suggestion of diagnoses. There is a strong need for education about AI and its use within dermatopathology.
| S-EPMC7606983 | biostudies-literature
Project description:As Artificial Intelligence (AI) proliferates across important social institutions, many of the most powerful AI systems available are difficult to interpret for end-users and engineers alike. Here, we sought to characterize public attitudes towards AI interpretability. Across seven studies (N = 2475), we demonstrate robust and positive attitudes towards interpretable AI among non-experts that generalize across a variety of real-world applications and follow predictable patterns. Participants value interpretability positively across different levels of AI autonomy and accuracy, and rate interpretability as more important for AI decisions involving high stakes and scarce resources. Crucially, when AI interpretability trades off against AI accuracy, participants prioritize accuracy over interpretability under the same conditions driving positive attitudes towards interpretability in the first place: amidst high stakes and scarce resources. These attitudes could drive a proliferation of AI systems making high-impact ethical decisions that are difficult to explain and understand. For many AI systems, it is hard to interpret how they make decisions. Here, the authors show that non-experts value interpretability in AI, especially for decisions involving high stakes and scarce resources, but they sacrifice AI interpretability when it trades off against AI accuracy.
| S-EPMC9528860 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe rollout of vaccines for COVID-19 in the United Kingdom started in December 2020. Uptake has been high, and there has been a subsequent reduction in infections, hospitalizations, and deaths among vaccinated individuals. However, vaccine hesitancy remains a concern, in particular relating to adverse effects following immunization (AEFIs). Social media analysis has the potential to inform policy makers about AEFIs being discussed by the public as well as public attitudes toward the national immunization campaign.ObjectiveWe sought to assess the frequency and nature of AEFI-related mentions on social media in the United Kingdom and to provide insights on public sentiments toward COVID-19 vaccines.MethodsWe extracted and analyzed over 121,406 relevant Twitter and Facebook posts, from December 8, 2020, to April 30, 2021. These were thematically filtered using a 2-step approach, initially using COVID-19-related keywords and then using vaccine- and manufacturer-related keywords. We identified AEFI-related keywords and modeled their word frequency to monitor their trends over 2-week periods. We also adapted and utilized our recently developed hybrid ensemble model, which combines state-of-the-art lexicon rule-based and deep learning-based approaches, to analyze sentiment trends relating to the main vaccines available in the United Kingdom.ResultsOur COVID-19 AEFI search strategy identified 46,762 unique Facebook posts by 14,346 users and 74,644 tweets (excluding retweets) by 36,446 users over the 4-month period. We identified an increasing trend in the number of mentions for each AEFI on social media over the study period. The most frequent AEFI mentions were found to be symptoms related to appetite (n=79,132, 14%), allergy (n=53,924, 9%), injection site (n=56,152, 10%), and clots (n=43,907, 8%). We also found some rarely reported AEFIs such as Bell palsy (n=11,909, 2%) and Guillain-Barre syndrome (n=9576, 2%) being discussed as frequently as more well-known side effects like headache (n=10,641, 2%), fever (n=12,707, 2%), and diarrhea (n=16,559, 3%). Overall, we found public sentiment toward vaccines and their manufacturers to be largely positive (58%), with a near equal split between negative (22%) and neutral (19%) sentiments. The sentiment trend was relatively steady over time and had minor variations, likely based on political and regulatory announcements and debates.ConclusionsThe most frequently discussed COVID-19 AEFIs on social media were found to be broadly consistent with those reported in the literature and by government pharmacovigilance. We also detected potential safety signals from our analysis that have been detected elsewhere and are currently being investigated. As such, we believe our findings support the use of social media analysis to provide a complementary data source to conventional knowledge sources being used for pharmacovigilance purposes.
| S-EPMC9150729 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundAdverse events are underreported in research studies, particularly randomized controlled trials and pharmacovigilance studies. A method that researchers could use to identify more complete safety profiles for medications is to use social media analytics. However, patient's perspectives on the ethical issues associated with using patient reports of adverse drug events on social media are unclear.ObjectiveThe objective of this study was to explore the ethics of using social media for detecting and monitoring adverse events for research purposes using a multi methods approach.MethodsA multi methods design comprising qualitative semistructured interviews (n=24), a focus group (n=3), and 3 Web-based discussions (n=20) with members of the public was adopted. Findings from a recent systematic review on the use of social media for monitoring adverse events provided a theoretical framework to interpret the study's findings.ResultsViews were ascertained regarding the potential benefits and harms of the research, privacy expectations, informed consent, and social media platform. Although the majority of participants were supportive of social media content being used for research on adverse events, a small number of participants strongly opposed the idea. The potential benefit of the research was cited as the most influential factor to whether participants would give their consent to their data being used for research. There were also some caveats to people's support for the use of their social media data for research purposes: the type of social media platform and consideration of the vulnerability of the social media user. Informed consent was regarded as difficult to obtain and this divided the opinion on whether it should be sought.ConclusionsSocial media users were generally positive about their social media data being used for research purposes; particularly for research on adverse events. However, approval was dependent on the potential benefit of the research and that individuals are protected from harm. Further study is required to establish when consent is required for an individual's social media data to be used.
| S-EPMC6740159 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundIncreasing patient loads, healthcare inflation and ageing population have put pressure on the healthcare system. Artificial intelligence and machine learning innovations can aid in task shifting to help healthcare systems remain efficient and cost effective. To gain an understanding of patients' acceptance toward such task shifting with the aid of AI, this study adapted the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology 2 (UTAUT2), looking at performance and effort expectancy, facilitating conditions, social influence, hedonic motivation and behavioural intention.MethodsThis was a cross-sectional study which took place between September 2021 to June 2022 at the National Heart Centre, Singapore. One hundred patients, aged ≥ 21 years with at least one heart failure symptom (pedal oedema, New York Heart Association II-III effort limitation, orthopnoea, breathlessness), who presented to the cardiac imaging laboratory for physician-ordered clinical echocardiogram, underwent both echocardiogram by skilled sonographers and the experience of echocardiogram by a novice guided by AI technologies. They were then given a survey which looked at the above-mentioned constructs using the UTAUT2 framework.ResultsSignificant, direct, and positive effects of all constructs on the behavioral intention of accepting the AI-novice combination were found. Facilitating conditions, hedonic motivation and performance expectancy were the top 3 constructs. The analysis of the moderating variables, age, gender and education levels, found no impact on behavioral intention.ConclusionsThese results are important for stakeholders and changemakers such as policymakers, governments, physicians, and insurance companies, as they design adoption strategies to ensure successful patient engagement by focusing on factors affecting the facilitating conditions, hedonic motivation and performance expectancy for AI technologies used in healthcare task shifting.
| S-EPMC11007870 | biostudies-literature