MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3123774137 · doi:10.1093/annweh/wxaa123

Twitter Analytics to Inform Provisional Guidance for COVID-19 Challenges in the Meatpacking Industry

2020· article· en· W3123774137 on OpenAlexafffund
Quentin Durand‐Moreau, Graham Mackenzie, Anil Adisesh, Sebastian Straube, Xin Hui S Chan, Nathan Zelyas, Trisha Greenhalgh

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of Work Exposures and Health · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Media in Health Education
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoSt. Michael's HospitalUniversity of Alberta
FundersWorkers' Compensation Board – Alberta
KeywordsSocial mediaAnalyticsPublic relationsSocial media analyticsCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)PandemicAccountability2019-20 coronavirus outbreakBusinessData scienceComputer sciencePolitical scienceWorld Wide WebMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The COVID-19 pandemic raised considerable challenges to obtain reliable guidance to help occupational health practitioners, workers, and stakeholders building up efficient prevention strategies at the workplace, between the constant increase of publications in the domain, the time required to run high-quality research and systematic reviews, and the urgent need to identify areas for prevention at the workplace. Social Media and Twitter, in particular, have already been used in research and constitute a useful source of information to identify community needs and topics of interest for prevention in the meatpacking industry. In this commentary, we introduce the methods and tools we used to screen relevant posts on Twitter. Twitter analytics is a way to capture real-time concerns of the community and help ensure compliance with the notion of social accountability. As such research has limitations in terms of exhaustiveness and level of evidence, it should be considered as provisional guidance to direct both actions at the workplace and further conventional research projects.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.790
Threshold uncertainty score0.347

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.708
GPT teacher head0.549
Teacher spread0.160 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations9
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of Work Exposures and HealthSame topicSocial Media in Health EducationFrench-language works237,207