American Twitter Users Revealed Social Determinants-related Oral Health Disparities amid the COVID-19 Pandemic

Objectives: To assess self-reported population oral health conditions amid COVID-19 pandemic using user reports on Twitter. Method and Material: We collected oral health-related tweets during the COVID-19 pandemic from 9,104 Twitter users across 26 states (with sufficient samples) in the United States between November 12, 2020 and June 14, 2021. We inferred user demographics by leveraging the visual information from the user profile images. Other characteristics including income, population density, poverty rate, health insurance coverage rate, community water fluoridation rate, and relative change in the number of daily confirmed COVID-19 cases were acquired or inferred based on retrieved information from user profiles. We performed logistic regression to examine whether discussions vary across user characteristics. Results: Overall, 26.70% of the Twitter users discuss wisdom tooth pain/jaw hurt, 23.86% tweet about dental service/cavity, 18.97% discuss chipped tooth/tooth break, 16.23% talk about dental pain, and the rest are about tooth decay/gum bleeding. Women and younger adults (19-29) are more likely to talk about oral health problems. Health insurance coverage rate is the most significant predictor in logistic regression for topic prediction. Conclusion: Tweets inform social disparities in oral health during the pandemic. For instance, people from counties at a higher risk of COVID-19 talk more about tooth decay/gum bleeding and chipped tooth/tooth break. Older adults, who are vulnerable to COVID-19, are more likely to discuss dental pain. Topics of interest vary across user characteristics. Through the lens of social media, our findings may provide insights for oral health practitioners and policy makers.Comment: Accepted for publication in Quintessence Internationa

Look behind the Censorship: Reposting-User Characterization and Muted-Topic Restoration

The emergence of social media has largely eased the way people receive information and participate in public discussions. However, in countries with strict regulations on discussions in the public space, social media is no exception. To limit the degree of dissent or inhibit the spread of "harmful" information, a common approach is to impose information operations such as censorship/suspension on social media. In this paper, we focus on a study of censorship on Weibo, the counterpart of Twitter in China. Specifically, we 1) create a web-scraping pipeline and collect a large dataset solely focus on the reposts from Weibo; 2) discover the characteristics of users whose reposts contain censored information, in terms of gender, device, and account type; and 3) conduct a thematic analysis by extracting and analyzing topic information. Note that although the original posts are no longer visible, we can use comments users wrote when reposting the original post to infer the topic of the original content. We find that such efforts can recover the discussions around social events that triggered massive discussions but were later muted. Further, we show the variations of inferred topics across different user groups and time frames.Comment: Accepted for publication in Proceedings of the International Workshop on Social Sensing (SocialSens 2022): Special Edition on Belief Dynamics, 202

Bias or Diversity? Unraveling Semantic Discrepancy in U.S. News Headlines

There is a broad consensus that news media outlets incorporate ideological biases in their news articles. However, prior studies on measuring the discrepancies among media outlets and further dissecting the origins of semantic differences suffer from small sample sizes and limited scope. In this study, we collect a large dataset of 1.8 million news headlines from major U.S. media outlets spanning from 2014 to 2022 to thoroughly track and dissect the semantic discrepancy in U.S. news media. We employ multiple correspondence analysis (MCA) to quantify the semantic discrepancy relating to four prominent topics - domestic politics, economic issues, social issues, and foreign affairs. Additionally, we compare the most frequent n-grams in media headlines to provide further qualitative insights into our analysis. Our findings indicate that on domestic politics and social issues, the discrepancy can be attributed to a certain degree of media bias. Meanwhile, the discrepancy in reporting foreign affairs is largely attributed to the diversity in individual journalistic styles. Finally, U.S. media outlets show consistency and high similarity in their coverage of economic issues