Dataset Information

Examining Twitter Discourse on Electronic Cigarette and Tobacco Consumption During National Cancer Prevention Month in 2018: Topic Modeling and Geospatial Analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Examining public perception of tobacco products is critical for effective tobacco policy making and public education outreach. While the link between traditional tobacco products and lung cancer is well established, it is not known how the public perceives the association between electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) and lung cancer. In addition, it is unclear how members of the public interact with official messages during cancer campaigns on tobacco consumption and lung cancer.

Objective

In this study, we aimed to analyze e-cigarette and smoking tweets in the context of lung cancer during National Cancer Prevention Month in 2018 and examine how e-cigarette and traditional tobacco product discussions relate to implementation of tobacco control policies across different states in the United States.

Methods

We mined tweets that contained the term "lung cancer" on Twitter from February to March 2018. The data set contained 13,946 publicly available tweets that occurred during National Cancer Prevention Month (February 2018), and 10,153 tweets that occurred during March 2018. E-cigarette-related and smoking-related tweets were retrieved, using topic modeling and geospatial analysis.

Results

Debates on harmfulness (454/915, 49.7%), personal experiences (316/915, 34.5%), and e-cigarette risks (145/915, 15.8%) were the major themes of e-cigarette tweets related to lung cancer. Policy discussions (2251/3870, 58.1%), smoking risks (843/3870, 21.8%), and personal experiences (776/3870, 20.1%) were the major themes of smoking tweets related to lung cancer. Geospatial analysis showed that discussion on e-cigarette risks was positively correlated with the number of state-level smoke-free policies enacted for e-cigarettes. In particular, the number of indoor and on campus smoke-free policies was related to the number of tweets on e-cigarette risks (smoke-free indoor, r49=0.33, P=.02; smoke-free campus, r49=0.32, P=.02). The total number of e-cigarette policies was also positively related to the number of tweets on e-cigarette risks (r49=0.32, P=.02). In contrast, the number of smoking policies was not significantly associated with any of the smoking themes in the lung cancer discourse (P>.13).

Conclusions

Though people recognized the importance of traditional tobacco control policies in reducing lung cancer incidences, their views on e-cigarette risks were divided, and discussions on the importance of e-cigarette policy control were missing from public discourse. Findings suggest the need for health organizations to continuously engage the public in discussions on the potential health risks of e-cigarettes and raise awareness of the insidious lobbying efforts from the tobacco industry.

SUBMITTER: Lu J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8756341 | 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:ObjectivesDespite increases in global health actors and funding levels, health inequities persist. We empirically tested whether global health governance (GHG) operates under the rational actor model (RAM) and characterised GHG power dynamics.DesignWe collected approximately 75 000 tweets of 20 key global health actors, between 2016 and 2020, using Twitter API. We generated priorities from tweets collected using topic modelling. Priorities from tweets were compared with stated priorities from content analyses of policy documents and with revealed priorities from network analyses of development assistance for health funding data. Comparing priorities derived from Twitter, policy documents and funding data, we can test whether GHG operates under RAM and characterise power dynamics in GHG.Participants20 global health actors were identified based on a consensus of three peer-reviewed articles mapping global health networks. All tweets of each actor were collected in 3-month intervals from November 2016 to May 2020. Policy documents and developmental assistance for health (DAH) financial data for each actor were collected for the same period.ResultsWe find all 20 actors and the global health system collectively fulfil the three conditions of RAM based on stated and revealed priorities. We also find compulsory and institutional power asymmetries in GHG. Funding organisations have compulsory power over channels of DAH and implementing institutions they directly fund. Funding organisations also have transitive influence over implementing institutions receiving DAH funding.ConclusionsWe find that there is a correlation between the priorities of large funders and the priorities of health actors. This correlation in conjunction with GHG operating under the RAM and the asymmetric power held by funders raises issues. GHG under the RAM grants large funders majority of the power to determine global health priorities and ultimately influencing outcomes while implementing organisations, especially those that work closest with populations, have little to limited influence in priority-setting.

Project description:Background: Perceptions of tobacco, cannabis, and electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS) are continually evolving in the United States. Exploring these characteristics through user generated text sources may provide novel insights into product use behavior that are challenging to identify using survey-based methods. The objective of this study was to compare the topics frequently discussed among Reddit members in cannabis, tobacco, and ENDS-specific subreddits. Methods: We collected 643,070 posts on the social media site Reddit between January 2013 and December 2018. We developed and validated an annotation scheme, achieving a high level of agreement among annotators. We then manually coded a subset of 2,630 posts for their content with relation to experiences and use of the three products of interest, and further developed word cloud representations of the words contained in these posts. Finally, we applied Latent Dirichlet Allocation (LDA) topic modeling to the 643,070 posts to identify emerging themes related to cannabis, tobacco, and ENDS products being discussed on Reddit. Results: Our manual annotation process yielded 2,148 (81.6%) posts that contained a mention(s) of either cannabis, tobacco, or ENDS with 1,537 (71.5%) of these posts mentioning cannabis, 421 (19.5%) mentioning ENDS, and 264 (12.2%) mentioning tobacco. In cannabis-specific subreddits, personal experiences with cannabis, cannabis legislation, health effects of cannabis use, methods and forms of cannabis, and the cultivation of cannabis were commonly discussed topics. The discussion in tobacco-specific subreddits often focused on the discussion of brands and types of combustible tobacco, as well as smoking cessation experiences and advice. In ENDS-specific subreddits, topics often included ENDS accessories and parts, flavors and nicotine solutions, procurement of ENDS, and the use of ENDS for smoking cessation. Conclusion: Our findings highlight the posting and participation patterns of Reddit members in cannabis, tobacco, and ENDS-specific subreddits and provide novel insights into aspects of personal use regarding these products. These findings complement epidemiologic study designs and highlight the potential of using specific subreddits to explore personal experiences with cannabis, ENDS, and tobacco products.

Project description:BackgroundThere is considerable debate about the benefits and risks of electronic cigarettes (ECs). To better understand the risk-benefit ratio of ECs, more information is needed about net nicotine consumption and toxicant exposure of cigarette smokers switching to ECs.MethodsForty cigarette smokers (?1 year of smoking) interested in switching to ECs but not necessarily quitting smoking were enrolled in a 4-week observational study and provided an e-Go C non-variable battery and refillable atomizers and choice of eight flavors in 12 or 24 mg nicotine dosage. Measurement of urinary cotinine (metabolite of nicotine), 4-(methylnitrosamino)-1-(3-pyridyl)-1-butanol (NNAL; a pulmonary carcinogen), and eight volatile organic compounds (VOCs) that are toxic tobacco smoke constituents was conducted at baseline and week 4.ResultsAll participants with follow-up data (92.5%) reported using the study EC. Of the 40 smokers, 16 reported no cigarettes at week 2 (40%) and six continued to report no cigarettes at week 4 (15%). Change in nicotine intake over the 4 weeks was non-significant (p = .90). Carbon monoxide (p < .001), NNAL (p < .01) and metabolites of benzene (p < .01) and acrylonitrile (p = .001) were significantly decreased in the study sample. Smokers switching exclusively to ECs for at least half of the study period demonstrated significant reductions in metabolites of ethylene oxide (p = .03) and acrylamide (p < .01).ConclusionSmokers using ECs over 4 weeks maintained cotinine levels and experienced significant reductions in carbon monoxide, NNAL, and two out of eight measured VOC metabolites. Those who switched exclusively to ECs for at least half of the study period significantly reduced two additional VOCs.ImplicationsThis study extends current literature by measuring change in smoking dependence and disease-associated biomarkers, NNAL and a panel of eight common VOCs that are toxic tobacco smoke constituents in smokers who switch to ECs. The findings support the idea of harm reduction, however some levels of toxicant exposure are still of clinical concern, particularly for dual users. Extrapolation of these results must be careful to separate the different toxic exposure results for exclusive switchers versus dual cigarette + EC users, and not to equate harm reduction with the idea that using ECs is harmless.