Dataset Information

Citation needed? Wikipedia bibliometrics during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic.

ABSTRACT:

Background

With the COVID-19 pandemic's outbreak, millions flocked to Wikipedia for updated information. Amid growing concerns regarding an "infodemic," ensuring the quality of information is a crucial vector of public health. Investigating whether and how Wikipedia remained up to date and in line with science is key to formulating strategies to counter misinformation. Using citation analyses, we asked which sources informed Wikipedia's COVID-19-related articles before and during the pandemic's first wave (January-May 2020).

Results

We found that coronavirus-related articles referenced trusted media outlets and high-quality academic sources. Regarding academic sources, Wikipedia was found to be highly selective in terms of what science was cited. Moreover, despite a surge in COVID-19 preprints, Wikipedia had a clear preference for open-access studies published in respected journals and made little use of preprints. Building a timeline of English-language COVID-19 articles from 2001-2020 revealed a nuanced trade-off between quality and timeliness. It further showed how pre-existing articles on key topics related to the virus created a framework for integrating new knowledge. Supported by a rigid sourcing policy, this "scientific infrastructure" facilitated contextualization and regulated the influx of new information. Last, we constructed a network of DOI-Wikipedia articles, which showed the landscape of pandemic-related knowledge on Wikipedia and how academic citations create a web of shared knowledge supporting topics like COVID-19 drug development.

Conclusions

Understanding how scientific research interacts with the digital knowledge-sphere during the pandemic provides insight into how Wikipedia can facilitate access to science. It also reveals how, aided by what we term its "citizen encyclopedists," it successfully fended off COVID-19 disinformation and how this unique model may be deployed in other contexts.

SUBMITTER: Benjakob O

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8756189 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has caused mental health problems worldwide. The psychopathological implications of COVID-19 in cancer patients have rarely been addressed. Considering the increased vulnerability of oncology patients, this issue needs to be addressed to improve the long-term mental health status of these patients. Methods: We conducted a prospective study in outpatients under active cancer treatment during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. A semi-structured 24-question survey was designed to measure baseline sociodemographic, psychosocial and COVID-19 exposure characteristics. The Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale was used to measure psychological symptoms. A descriptive and analytical univariate analysis of the variables studied was performed. We used the Z-score to compare different populations (experimental and historical control cohort). Results: 104 patients were included, the majority of which were women (64.4%), were above 65 years of age (57.7%), had either lung and breast cancer (56.7%), had advanced disease (64%) and were undergoing chemotherapy (63.5%). 51% of them expressed greater fear of cancer than of COVID-19 infection or both. In relation to HADS, 52.8% of emotional distress, 42.3% of anxiety and 58.6% of depression rates were detected. The main factors related with higher rates of psychological symptomatology were history of previous psychotropic drug consumption and the adoption of additional infection prevention measures because they considered themselves at risk of severe COVID-19 infection (p = 0.008; p = 0.003 for emotional distress, p = 0.026; p = 0.004 for anxiety, and p = 0.013; p = 0.008 for depression). Tumor type, stage, oncologic treatment or rescheduling of cancer treatments were not related to higher levels of psychological symptomatology. Comparison of our results with another population of similar characteristics was not significant (Z score = -1.88; p = 0.060). Conclusions: We detected high rates of emotional distress during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic among cancer patients in active treatment (52.8%). This was higher and clinically relevant than observed in a comparable population (42.5%), although not significant. Cancer itself is the main factor of concern for cancer patients, above and beyond the emotional distress generated by COVID-19 pandemic.

Project description:ObjectivesTo measure the effect of social distancing on reducing daily deaths, infections and hospital resources needed for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients during the first wave of the pandemic in Nordic countries.MethodsThe observations of social distancing, daily deaths, infections along with the needed hospital resources for COVID-19 patient hospitalizations including the numbers of all hospital beds, beds needed in ICUs and infection wards, nursing staffs needed in ICUs and infection wards were collected from the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation (IHME) by the University of Washington. The observations of social distancing were based on the reduction in human contact relative to background levels for each location quantified by cell phone mobility data collected from IHME. The weighted data per 100,000 population gathered in a 40-day period of the first wave of the pandemic in Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway and Sweden. Statistical technique of panel data analysis is used to measure the associations between social distancing and COVID-19 indicators in long-run.ResultsResults of dynamic long-run models confirm that a 1% rise in social distancing by reducing human contacts may decline daily deaths, daily infections, all hospital beds needed, beds/nurses needed in ICUs and beds/nurses needed in infection wards due COVID-19 pandemic by 1.13%, 15.26%, 1.10%, 1.17% and 1.89%, respectively. Moreover, results of error correction models verify that if the equilibriums between these series are disrupted by a sudden change in social distancing, the lengths of restoring back to equilibrium are 67, 62, 40, 22 and 49 days for daily deaths, daily infections, all hospital beds needed, nurses/beds needed in ICUs and nurses/beds needed in infection wards, respectively.ConclusionProper social distancing was a successful policy for tackling COVID-19 with falling mortality and infection rates as well as the needed hospital resources for patient hospitalizations in Nordic countries. The results alert governments of the need for continuously implementing social distancing policies while using vaccines to prevent national lockdowns and reduce the burden of patient hospitalizations.

Project description:BackgroundTechnologies have been extensively implemented to provide health care services for all types of clinical conditions during the COVID-19 pandemic. While several reviews have been conducted regarding technologies used during the COVID-19 pandemic, they were limited by focusing either on a specific technology (or features) or proposed rather than implemented technologies.ObjectiveThis review aims to provide an overview of technologies, as reported in the literature, implemented during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic.MethodsWe conducted a scoping review using PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses) Extension for Scoping Reviews. Studies were retrieved by searching 8 electronic databases, checking the reference lists of included studies and relevant reviews (backward reference list checking), and checking studies that cited included studies (forward reference list checking). The search terms were chosen based on the target intervention (ie, technologies) and the target disease (ie, COVID-19). We included English publications that focused on technologies or digital tools implemented during the COVID-19 pandemic to provide health-related services regardless of target health condition, user, or setting. Two reviewers independently assessed the eligibility of studies and extracted data from eligible papers. We used a narrative approach to synthesize extracted data.ResultsOf 7374 retrieved papers, 126 were deemed eligible. Telemedicine was the most common type of technology (107/126, 84.9%) implemented in the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, and the most common mode of telemedicine was synchronous (100/108, 92.6%). The most common purpose of the technologies was providing consultation (75/126, 59.5%), followed by following up with patients (45/126, 35.7%), and monitoring their health status (22/126, 17.4%). Zoom (22/126, 17.5%) and WhatsApp (12/126, 9.5%) were the most commonly used videoconferencing and social media platforms, respectively. Both health care professionals and health consumers were the most common target users (103/126, 81.7%). The health condition most frequently targeted was COVID-19 (38/126, 30.2%), followed by any physical health conditions (21/126, 16.7%), and mental health conditions (13/126, 10.3%). Technologies were web-based in 84.1% of the studies (106/126). Technologies could be used through 11 modes, and the most common were mobile apps (86/126, 68.3%), desktop apps (73/126, 57.9%), telephone calls (49/126, 38.9%), and websites (45/126, 35.7%).ConclusionsTechnologies played a crucial role in mitigating the challenges faced during the COVID-19 pandemic. We did not find papers describing the implementation of other technologies (eg, contact-tracing apps, drones, blockchain) during the first wave. Furthermore, technologies in this review were used for other purposes (eg, drugs and vaccines discovery, social distancing, and immunity passport). Future research on studies on these technologies and purposes is recommended, and further reviews are required to investigate technologies implemented in subsequent waves of the pandemic.