MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4206066386 · doi:10.31219/osf.io/7hypj

Public Health Communication and Engagement on Social Media during the COVID-19 Pandemic

2020· preprint· en· W4206066386 on OpenAlexaffabout
Lisa Teichmann, Sean Nossek, Aengus Bridgman, Peter John Loewen, Taylor Owen, Derek Ruths, Oleg Zhilin

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Media and Politics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGovernment (linguistics)PandemicSocial mediaPublic healthHealth communicationCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Public relationsPublic engagementPolitical scienceBusinessMedicineDiseaseInfectious disease (medical specialty)Nursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Social media provides governments the opportunity to directly communicate with their constituents. During a pandemic, reaching as many citizens as possible with health messaging is critical to reducing the spread of the disease. This study evaluates efforts to spread healthcare information by Canadian local, provincial, and federal governments during the first five months of the COVID-19 pandemic. We collect all health-related communications coming from government accounts on Facebook and Twitter and analyze the data using a nested mixed method approach. We first identify quantifiable features linked with citizen engagement, before subsequently performing content analysis on outlier posts. We make two critical contributions to existing knowledge about government communication, particularly during public health crises. We identify cross-platform variations in strategy effectiveness and draw attention to specific, evidence-based practices that can increase engagement with government health information.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.705
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.488
GPT teacher head0.454
Teacher spread0.034 · 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.

Study designQualitative
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

Citations43
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSocial Media and PoliticsFrench-language works237,207