The DOI matches its Crossref record; 10 of the 10 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Social Network Analysis of COVID-19 Sentiments: Application of Artificial Intelligence
Open accessAbstract
Background: The coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic led to substantial public discussion. Understanding these discussions can help institutions, governments, and individuals navigate the pandemic. Objective: The aim of this study is to analyze discussions on Twitter related to COVID-19 and to investigate the sentiments toward COVID-19. Methods: This study applied machine learning methods in the field of artificial intelligence to analyze data collected from Twitter. Using tweets originating exclusively in the United States and written in English during the 1-month period from March 20 to April 19, 2020, the study examined COVID-19–related discussions. Social network and sentiment analyses were also conducted to determine the social network of dominant topics and whether the tweets expressed positive, neutral, or negative sentiments. Geographic analysis of the tweets was also conducted. Results: There were a total of 14,180,603 likes, 863,411 replies, 3,087,812 retweets, and 641,381 mentions in tweets during the study timeframe. Out of 902,138 tweets analyzed, sentiment analysis classified 434,254 (48.2%) tweets as having a positive sentiment, 187,042 (20.7%) as neutral, and 280,842 (31.1%) as negative. The study identified 5 dominant themes among COVID-19–related tweets: health care environment, emotional support, business economy, social change, and psychological stress. Alaska, Wyoming, New Mexico, Pennsylvania, and Florida were the states expressing the most negative sentiment while Vermont, North Dakota, Utah, Colorado, Tennessee, and North Carolina conveyed the most positive sentiment. Conclusions: This study identified 5 prevalent themes of COVID-19 discussion with sentiments ranging from positive to negative. These themes and sentiments can clarify the public’s response to COVID-19 and help officials navigate the pandemic.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Stress, social support, and the buffering hypothesis
Cohen, S., & Wills, T. A. (1985) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.98.2.310 · Cited by 18,093
The Psychological Impact of Quarantine and How to Reduce It: Rapid Review of the Evidence
Brooks, S. K., Webster, R. K., Smith, L. E., Woodland, L., Wessely, S., Greenberg, N., & Rubin, G. J. (2020) · doi:10.2139/ssrn.3532534 · Cited by 16,394
The psychological impact of quarantine and how to reduce it: Rapid review of the evidence
Brooks, S. K., Webster, R. K., Smith, L. E., Woodland, L., Wessely, S., Greenberg, N., & Rubin, G. J. (2020) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(20)30460-8 · Cited by 16,378
First case of 2019 novel coronavirus in the United States
Holshue, M. L., DeBolt, C., Lindquist, S., Lofy, K. H., Wiesman, J., Bruce, H., Spitters, C., Ericson, K., Wilkerson, S., Tural, A., et al. (2020) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmoa2001191 · Cited by 6,030
Clinical, laboratory and imaging features of COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis
Rodriguez-Morales, A. J., Cardona-Ospina, J. A., Gutiérrez-Ocampo, E., Villamizar-Peña, R., Holguin-Rivera, Y., Escalera-Antezana, J. P., Alvarado-Arnez, L. E., Bonilla-Aldana, D. K., Franco-Paredes, C., Henao-Martinez, A. F., et al. (2020) · Travel Medicine and Infectious Disease · doi:10.1016/j.tmaid.2020.101623 · Cited by 2,542
Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19): A Perspective from China
Zu, Z. Y., Jiang, M. D., Xu, P. P., Chen, W., Ni, Q. Q., Lu, G. M., & Zhang, L. J. (2020) · Radiology · doi:10.1148/radiol.2020200490 · Cited by 2,070 · cited 1×
“COVID-19 is caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), a novel human pathogen that virologists believe emerged from bats and eventually jumped to humans via an intermediary host [1].”
BackgroundRanney, M. L., Griffeth, V., & Jha, A. K. (2020) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmp2006141 · Cited by 2,018
SARS control and psychological effects of quarantine, Toronto, Canada
Hawryluck, L., Gold, W. L., Robinson, S., Pogorski, S., Galea, S., & Styra, R. (2004) · Emerging Infectious Diseases · doi:10.3201/eid1007.030703 · Cited by 1,929
Salathé, M., Bengtsson, L., Bodnar, T. J., Brewer, D. D., Brownstein, J. S., Buckee, C., Campbell, E. M., Cattuto, C., Khandelwal, S., Mabry, P. L., et al. (2012) · PLoS Computational Biology · doi:10.1371/journal.pcbi.1002616 · Cited by 500
Studdert, D. M., & Hall, M. A. (2020) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmp2007637 · Cited by 186 · cited 1×
“Resentment and resistance to these changes in daily life is becoming increasingly evident [10].”
Background
Cited by
Social Media Use for Health Purposes: Systematic Review
Chen, J., & Wang, Y. (2021) · Journal of Medical Internet Research · doi:10.2196/17917 · Cited by 1,073
Hussain, A., Tahir, A., Hussain, Z., Sheikh, Z., Gogate, M., Dashtipour, K., Ali, A., & Sheikh, A. (2021) · Journal of Medical Internet Research · doi:10.2196/26627 · Cited by 285
Trends in artificial intelligence in nursing: Impacts on nursing management
Chang, C., Jen, H., & Su, W. (2022) · Journal of Nursing Management · doi:10.1111/jonm.13770 · Cited by 76
Thapa, S., Shiwakoti, S., Shah, S. B., Adhikari, S., Veeramani, H., Nasim, M., & Naseem, U. (2025) · Social Network Analysis and Mining · doi:10.1007/s13278-025-01428-9 · Cited by 74
Jones, R., Mougouei, D., & Evans, S. L. (2021) · Human Behavior and Emerging Technologies · doi:10.1002/hbe2.304 · Cited by 62
Metadata
- Authors
- Hung, M., Lauren, E., Hon, E. S., Birmingham, W. C., Xu, J., Su, S., Hon, S. D., Park, J., Dang, P., & Lipsky, M. S.
- Venue
- Journal of Medical Internet Research
- Publisher
- JMIR Publications Inc.
- Published
- 2020-08-18
- Volume
- 22
- Issue
- 8
- Pages
- e22590
- ISSN
- 1438-8871 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W3047045277
- Cited by
- 244
- References
- 10
- FWCI
- 17.24
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
