IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v20y2023i3p2225-d1047472.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Sentiment Analysis on Twitter: Role of Healthcare Professionals in the Global Conversation during the AstraZeneca Vaccine Suspension

Author

Listed:
  • Carlos Ruiz-Núñez

    (Program in Biomedicine, Translational Research, and New Health Technologies, School of Medicine, University of Malaga, Blvr. Louis Pasteur, 29010 Malaga, Spain
    These authors contributed equally to this work.)

  • Ivan Herrera-Peco

    (Faculty of Health Sciences, Universidad Alfonso X el Sabio, Avda Universidad, 1, Villanueva de la Cañada, 28691 Madrid, Spain
    These authors contributed equally to this work.)

  • Silvia María Campos-Soler

    (Faculty of Medicine, Universidad Alfonso X el Sabio, Avda Universidad, 1, Villanueva de la Cañada, 28691 Madrid, Spain)

  • Álvaro Carmona-Pestaña

    (Faculty of Medicine, Universidad Alfonso X el Sabio, Avda Universidad, 1, Villanueva de la Cañada, 28691 Madrid, Spain)

  • Elvira Benítez de Gracia

    (Faculty of Health Sciences, Universidad Alfonso X el Sabio, Avda Universidad, 1, Villanueva de la Cañada, 28691 Madrid, Spain)

  • Juan José Peña Deudero

    (Faculty of Health Sciences, Universidad Alfonso X el Sabio, Avda Universidad, 1, Villanueva de la Cañada, 28691 Madrid, Spain)

  • Andrés Ignacio García-Notario

    (Faculty of Medicine, Universidad Alfonso X el Sabio, Avda Universidad, 1, Villanueva de la Cañada, 28691 Madrid, Spain)

Abstract

The vaccines against COVID-19 arrived in Spain at the end of 2020 along with vaccination campaigns which were not free of controversy. The debate was fueled by the adverse effects following the administration of the AstraZeneca-Oxford (AZ) vaccine in some European countries, eventually leading to its temporary suspension as a precautionary measure. In the present study, we analyze the healthcare professionals’ conversations, sentiment, polarity, and intensity on social media during two periods in 2021: the one closest to the suspension of the AZ vaccine and the same time frame 30 days later. We also analyzed whether there were differences between Spain and the rest of the world. Results: The negative sentiment ratio was higher (U = 87; p = 0.048) in Spain in March (Med = 0.396), as well as the daily intensity (U = 86; p = 0.044; Med = 0.440). The opposite happened with polarity (U = 86; p = 0.044), which was higher in the rest of the world (Med = −0.264). Conclusions: There was a general increase in messages and interactions between March and April. In Spain, there was a higher incidence of negative messages and intensity compared to the rest of the world during the March period that disappeared in April. Finally, it was found that the dissemination of messages linked to negative emotions towards vaccines against COVID-19 from healthcare professionals contributed to a negative approach to primary prevention campaigns in the middle of the pandemic.

Suggested Citation

  • Carlos Ruiz-Núñez & Ivan Herrera-Peco & Silvia María Campos-Soler & Álvaro Carmona-Pestaña & Elvira Benítez de Gracia & Juan José Peña Deudero & Andrés Ignacio García-Notario, 2023. "Sentiment Analysis on Twitter: Role of Healthcare Professionals in the Global Conversation during the AstraZeneca Vaccine Suspension," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(3), pages 1-13, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:20:y:2023:i:3:p:2225-:d:1047472
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/20/3/2225/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/20/3/2225/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hunt Allcott & Matthew Gentzkow, 2017. "Social Media and Fake News in the 2016 Election," NBER Working Papers 23089, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. Courtney D. Corley & Diane J. Cook & Armin R. Mikler & Karan P. Singh, 2010. "Text and Structural Data Mining of Influenza Mentions in Web and Social Media," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 7(2), pages 1-20, February.
    3. Vasile-Daniel Păvăloaia & Elena-Mădălina Teodor & Doina Fotache & Magdalena Danileţ, 2019. "Opinion Mining on Social Media Data: Sentiment Analysis of User Preferences," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(16), pages 1-21, August.
    4. Cynthia Chew & Gunther Eysenbach, 2010. "Pandemics in the Age of Twitter: Content Analysis of Tweets during the 2009 H1N1 Outbreak," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 5(11), pages 1-13, November.
    5. Wasim Ahmed & Josep Vidal-Alaball & Josep M. Vilaseca, 2022. "A Social Network Analysis of Twitter Data Related to Blood Clots and Vaccines," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(8), pages 1-8, April.
    6. Hunt Allcott & Matthew Gentzkow, 2017. "Social Media and Fake News in the 2016 Election," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 31(2), pages 211-236, Spring.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Ryan Thomson & Rebecca Mosier & Michelle Worosz, 2023. "COVID research across the social sciences in 2020: a bibliometric approach," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(6), pages 3377-3399, June.
    2. Julia Cage & Nicolas Hervé & Marie-Luce Viaud, 2017. "The Production of Information in an Online World: Is Copy Right?," Working Papers hal-03393171, HAL.
    3. Leopoldo Fergusson & Carlos Molina, 2020. "Facebook Causes Protests," HiCN Working Papers 323, Households in Conflict Network.
    4. Tetsuro Kobayashi & Fumiaki Taka & Takahisa Suzuki, 2021. "Can “Googling” correct misbelief? Cognitive and affective consequences of online search," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(9), pages 1-16, September.
    5. Dean Neu & Gregory D. Saxton & Abu S. Rahaman, 2022. "Social Accountability, Ethics, and the Occupy Wall Street Protests," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 180(1), pages 17-31, September.
    6. Robbett, Andrea & Matthews, Peter Hans, 2018. "Partisan bias and expressive voting," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 157(C), pages 107-120.
    7. Henrik Skaug Sætra, 2021. "AI in Context and the Sustainable Development Goals: Factoring in the Unsustainability of the Sociotechnical System," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-19, February.
    8. Fathey Mohammed & Nabil Hasan Al-Kumaim & Ahmed Ibrahim Alzahrani & Yousef Fazea, 2023. "The Impact of Social Media Shared Health Content on Protective Behavior against COVID-19," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(3), pages 1-16, January.
    9. Michele Cantarella & Nicolo' Fraccaroli & Roberto Volpe, 2019. "Does fake news affect voting behaviour?," Department of Economics 0146, University of Modena and Reggio E., Faculty of Economics "Marco Biagi".
    10. Joël Cariolle & Yasmine Elkhateeb & Mathilde Maurel, 2022. "(Mis-)information technology: Internet use and perception of democracy in Africa," Documents de travail du Centre d'Economie de la Sorbonne 22010, Université Panthéon-Sorbonne (Paris 1), Centre d'Economie de la Sorbonne.
    11. Kerim Peren Arin & Juan A. Lacomba & Francisco Lagos & Deni Mazrekaj & Marcel Thum, 2021. "Misperceptions and Fake News during the Covid-19 Pandemic," CESifo Working Paper Series 9066, CESifo.
    12. Bartosz Wilczek, 2020. "Misinformation and herd behavior in media markets: A cross-national investigation of how tabloids’ attention to misinformation drives broadsheets’ attention to misinformation in political and business," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(11), pages 1-22, November.
    13. Barrera, Oscar & Guriev, Sergei & Henry, Emeric & Zhuravskaya, Ekaterina, 2020. "Facts, alternative facts, and fact checking in times of post-truth politics," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 182(C).
    14. Sumeet Kumar & Binxuan Huang & Ramon Alfonso Villa Cox & Kathleen M. Carley, 2021. "An anatomical comparison of fake-news and trusted-news sharing pattern on Twitter," Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, Springer, vol. 27(2), pages 109-133, June.
    15. Julia Cagé & Nicolas Hervé & Marie-Luce Viaud, 2020. "The Production of Information in an Online World," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 87(5), pages 2126-2164.
    16. Zazli Lily Wisker & Robert Neil McKie, 2021. "The effect of fake news on anger and negative word-of-mouth: moderating roles of religiosity and conservatism," Journal of Marketing Analytics, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 9(2), pages 144-153, June.
    17. Roger D. Magarey & Christina M. Trexler, 2020. "Information: a missing component in understanding and mitigating social epidemics," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 7(1), pages 1-11, December.
    18. Denter, Philipp & Ginzburg, Boris, 2021. "Troll Farms and Voter Disinformation," MPRA Paper 109634, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    19. Christoph March & Ina Schieferdecker, 2021. "Technological Sovereignty as Ability, Not Autarky," CESifo Working Paper Series 9139, CESifo.
    20. Larsen, Vegard H. & Thorsrud, Leif Anders & Zhulanova, Julia, 2021. "News-driven inflation expectations and information rigidities," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 507-520.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:20:y:2023:i:3:p:2225-:d:1047472. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.