Dataset Information

Tracking Private WhatsApp Discourse About COVID-19 in Singapore: Longitudinal Infodemiology Study.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Worldwide, social media traffic increased following the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. Although the spread of COVID-19 content has been described for several social media platforms (eg, Twitter and Facebook), little is known about how such content is spread via private messaging platforms, such as WhatsApp (WhatsApp LLC).

Objective

In this study, we documented (1) how WhatsApp is used to transmit COVID-19 content, (2) the characteristics of WhatsApp users based on their usage patterns, and (3) how usage patterns link to COVID-19 concerns.

Methods

We used the experience sampling method to track day-to-day WhatsApp usage during the COVID-19 pandemic. For 1 week, participants reported each day the extent to which they had received, forwarded, or discussed COVID-19 content. The final data set comprised 924 data points, which were collected from 151 participants.

Results

During the weeklong monitoring process, most participants (143/151, 94.7%) reported at least 1 COVID-19-related use of WhatsApp. When a taxonomy was generated based on usage patterns, around 1 in 10 participants (21/151, 13.9%) were found to have received and shared a high volume of forwarded COVID-19 content, akin to super-spreaders identified on other social media platforms. Finally, those who engaged with more COVID-19 content in their personal chats were more likely to report having COVID-19-related thoughts throughout the day.

Conclusions

Our findings provide a rare window into discourse on private messaging platforms. Such data can be used to inform risk communication strategies during the pandemic.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04367363; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04367363.

SUBMITTER: Tan EY

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8709420 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundSocial media is a rich source where we can learn about people's reactions to social issues. As COVID-19 has impacted people's lives, it is essential to capture how people react to public health interventions and understand their concerns.ObjectiveWe aim to investigate people's reactions and concerns about COVID-19 in North America, especially in Canada.MethodsWe analyzed COVID-19-related tweets using topic modeling and aspect-based sentiment analysis (ABSA), and interpreted the results with public health experts. To generate insights on the effectiveness of specific public health interventions for COVID-19, we compared timelines of topics discussed with the timing of implementation of interventions, synergistically including information on people's sentiment about COVID-19-related aspects in our analysis. In addition, to further investigate anti-Asian racism, we compared timelines of sentiments for Asians and Canadians.ResultsTopic modeling identified 20 topics, and public health experts provided interpretations of the topics based on top-ranked words and representative tweets for each topic. The interpretation and timeline analysis showed that the discovered topics and their trend are highly related to public health promotions and interventions such as physical distancing, border restrictions, handwashing, staying home, and face coverings. After training the data using ABSA with human-in-the-loop, we obtained 545 aspect terms (eg, "vaccines," "economy," and "masks") and 60 opinion terms such as "infectious" (negative) and "professional" (positive), which were used for inference of sentiments of 20 key aspects selected by public health experts. The results showed negative sentiments related to the overall outbreak, misinformation and Asians, and positive sentiments related to physical distancing.ConclusionsAnalyses using natural language processing techniques with domain expert involvement can produce useful information for public health. This study is the first to analyze COVID-19-related tweets in Canada in comparison with tweets in the United States by using topic modeling and human-in-the-loop domain-specific ABSA. This kind of information could help public health agencies to understand public concerns as well as what public health messages are resonating in our populations who use Twitter, which can be helpful for public health agencies when designing a policy for new interventions.

Project description:BackgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic has necessitated a rapid shift in how individuals interact with and receive fundamental services, including health care. Although telemedicine is not a novel technology, previous studies have offered mixed opinions surrounding its utilization. However, there exists a dearth of research on how these opinions have evolved over the course of the current pandemic.ObjectiveThis study aims to evaluate how the language and sentiment surrounding telemedicine has evolved throughout the COVID-19 pandemic.MethodsTweets published between January 1, 2020, and April 24, 2021, containing at least one telemedicine-related and one COVID-19-related search term ("telemedicine-COVID") were collected from the Twitter full archive search (N=351,718). A comparator sample containing only COVID-19 terms ("general-COVID") was collected and sampled based on the daily distribution of telemedicine-COVID tweets. In addition to analyses of retweets and favorites, sentiment analysis was performed on both data sets in aggregate and within a subset of tweets receiving the top 100 most and least retweets.ResultsTelemedicine gained prominence during the early stages of the pandemic (ie, March through May 2020) before leveling off and reaching a steady state from June 2020 onward. Telemedicine-COVID tweets had a 21% lower average number of retweets than general-COVID tweets (incidence rate ratio 0.79, 95% CI 0.63-0.99; P=.04), but there was no difference in favorites. A majority of telemedicine-COVID tweets (180,295/351,718, 51.3%) were characterized as "positive," compared to only 38.5% (135,434/351,401) of general-COVID tweets (P<.001). This trend was also true on a monthly level from March 2020 through April 2021. The most retweeted posts in both telemedicine-COVID and general-COVID data sets were authored by journalists and politicians. Whereas the majority of the most retweeted posts within the telemedicine-COVID data set were positive (55/101, 54.5%), a plurality of the most retweeted posts within the general-COVID data set were negative (44/89, 49.4%; P=.01).ConclusionsDuring the COVID-19 pandemic, opinions surrounding telemedicine evolved to become more positive, especially when compared to the larger pool of COVID-19-related tweets. Decision makers should capitalize on these shifting public opinions to invest in telemedicine infrastructure and ensure its accessibility and success in a postpandemic world.

Project description:BackgroundThe internet has become an important source of health information for users worldwide. The novel coronavirus caused a pandemic search for information with broad dissemination of false or misleading health information.ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to evaluate the quality and readability of online information about the coronavirus disease (COVID-19), which was a trending topic on the internet, using validated instruments and relating the quality of information to its readability.MethodsThe search was based on the term "Wuhan Coronavirus" on the Google website (February 6, 2020). At the search time, the terms "COVID-19" or "SARS-CoV-2" (severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2) did not exist. Critical analysis was performed on the first 110 hits using the Health on the Net Foundation Code of Conduct (HONcode), the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) benchmark, the DISCERN instrument, and Google ranking.ResultsThe first 110 websites were critically analyzed, and only 1.8% (n=2) of the websites had the HONcode seal. The JAMA benchmark showed that 39.1% (n=43) of the websites did not have any of the categories required by this tool, and only 10.0% (11/110) of the websites had the four quality criteria required by JAMA. The DISCERN score showed that 70.0% (n=77) of the websites were evaluated as having a low score and none were rated as having a high score.ConclusionsNonhealth personnel and the scientific community need to be aware about the quality of the information they read and produce, respectively. The Wuhan coronavirus health crisis misinformation was produced by the media, and the misinformation was obtained by users from the internet. The use of the internet has a risk to public health, and, in cases like this, the governments should be developing strategies to regulate health information on the internet without censuring the population. By February 6, 2020, no quality information was available on the internet about COVID-19.

Project description:BackgroundIn the context of the COVID-19 infodemic, the global profusion of monikers and hashtags for COVID-19 have found their way into daily communication and contributed to a backlash against China and the Chinese people.ObjectiveThis study examines public engagement in crisis communication about COVID-19 during the early epidemic stage and the practical strategy of social mobilization to mitigate the infodemic.MethodsWe retrieved the unbiased values of the top-ranked search phrases between December 30, 2019, and July 15, 2020, which normalized the anonymized, categorized, and aggregated samples from Google Search data. This study illustrates the most-searched terms, including the official COVID-19 terms, the stigmatized terms, and other controls, to measure the collective behavioral propensities to stigmatized terms and to explore the global reaction to the COVID-19 epidemic in the real world. We calculated the ratio of the cumulative number of COVID-19 cases to the regional population as the cumulative rate (R) of a specific country or territory and calculated the Gini coefficient (G) to measure the collective heterogeneity of crowd behavior.ResultsPeople around the world are using stigmatizing terms on Google Search, and these terms were used earlier than the official names. Many stigmatized monikers against China (eg, "Wuhan pneumonia," G=0.73; "Wuhan coronavirus," G=0.60; "China pneumonia," G=0.59; "China coronavirus," G=0.52; "Chinese coronavirus," G=0.50) had high collective heterogeneity of crowd behavior between December 30, 2019, and July 15, 2020, while the official terms "COVID-19" (G=0.44) and "SARS-CoV-2" (G=0.42) have not become de facto standard usages. Moreover, the pattern of high consistent usage was observed in 13 territories with low cumulative rates (R) between January 16 and July 15, 2020, out of 58 countries and territories that have reported confirmed cases of COVID-19. In the scientific literature, multifarious naming practices may have provoked unintended negative impacts by stigmatizing Chinese people. The World Health Organization; the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization; and the media initiated campaigns for fighting back against the COVID-19 infodemic with the same mission but in diverse voices.ConclusionsInfodemiological analysis can articulate the collective propensities to stigmatized monikers across search behaviors, which may reflect the collective sentiment of backlash against China and Chinese people in the real world. The full-fledged official terms are expected to fight back against the resilience of negative perceptual bias amid the COVID-19 epidemic. Such official naming efforts against the infodemic should be met with a fair share of identification in scientific conventions and sociocultural paradigms. As an integral component of preparedness, appropriate nomenclatures should be duly assigned to the newly identified coronavirus, and social mobilization in a uniform voice is a priority for combating the next infodemic.