One way to assess a certain aspect of the value of scientific research is to measure the attention it receives on social media. While previous research has mostly focused on the "number of mentions" of scientific research on social media, the current study applies "topic networks" to measure public attention to scientific research on Twitter. Topic networks are the networks of co-occurring author keywords in scholarly publications and networks of co-occurring hashtags in the tweets mentioning those scholarly publications. This study investigates which topics in opioid scholarly publications have received public attention on Twitter. Additionally, it investigates whether the topic networks generated from the publications tweeted by all accounts (bot and non-bot accounts) differ from those generated by non-bot accounts. Our analysis is based on a set of opioid scholarly publications from 2011 to 2019 and the tweets associated with them. We use co-occurrence network analysis to generate topic networks. Results indicated that Twitter users have mostly used generic terms to discuss opioid publications, such as "Opioid," "Pain," "Addiction," "Treatment," "Analgesics," "Abuse," "Overdose," and "Disorders." Results confirm that topic networks provide a legitimate method to visualize public discussions of health-related scholarly publications and how Twitter users discuss health-related scientific research differently from the scientific community. There was a substantial overlap between the topic networks based on the tweets by all accounts and non-bot accounts. This result indicates that it might not be necessary to exclude bot accounts for generating topic networks as they have a negligible impact on the results.
翻译:评估科学研究价值的某个方面的方法之一,是衡量其在社交媒体上受到的关注。虽然先前的研究主要侧重于社交媒体科学研究的“提及次数”,但目前的研究运用了“主题网络”来衡量公众对Twitter上科学研究的关注。主题网络是学术出版物中共同的作者关键词网络和提及这些学术出版物的推文中共同引发的标签网络。这项研究调查了类阿片学术出版物中哪些议题在推特上受到公众关注。此外,它调查了所有账户(机和非机账户)发布的出版物所产生的主题网络是否不同于非机账户产生的影响。我们的分析基于2011至2019年一系列类阿片学术出版物以及与其相关的推文。我们使用共同的网络分析来创建主题网络。结果显示,Twitter用户大多使用通用术语来讨论类阿片出版物,如“Opinioid”,“adbregation”,“Analgeicatement of coloral commissional commissional reports”,“Abusional resulate the real commissionalal reports”,“Offectiveal reportalalalalalalalalal” 和“Olives“Oral”等出版物可能通过大量研究,“Orports”和“Officalalalalals”的论文,“ODalalalalalalal”的论文,“ODals”和“Outalsals”的论文“Outals”等论文”的论文“结果,“ODal 和“结果,“Outtals”的论文“O,通过“O,“O,“OD’的理论”的论文“OD’“OD”表示,“OD’”和“Outalalalalsalsalsalsalsalsalsalsalsals”的理论,“结果,“结果,“结果,通过“结果”和“结果,”和“结果,”表示,”和“结果”等”等的理论的理论,“结果,“O。”表示。”表示。”表示“O。”和“结果”表示“O。”和“ODA”表示,“ODs”表示“OD’“O。”