COVID-19 and Tweets About Quitting Cigarette Smoking: Topic Model Analysis of Twitter Posts 2018-2020
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: The risk of infection and severity of illness by SARS-CoV-2 infection is elevated for people who smoke cigarettes and may motivate quitting. Organic public conversations on Twitter about quitting smoking could provide insight into quitting motivations or behaviors associated with the pandemic. Objective: This study explored key topics of conversation about quitting cigarette smoking and examined their trajectory during 2018-2020. Methods: Topic model analysis with latent Dirichlet allocation (LDA) identified themes in US tweets with the term "quit smoking." The model was trained on posts from 2018 and was then applied to tweets posted in 2019 and 2020. Analysis of variance and follow-up pairwise tests were used to compare the daily frequency of tweets within and across years by quarter. Results: The mean numbers of daily tweets on quitting smoking in 2018, 2019, and 2020 were 133 (SD 36.2), 145 (SD 69.4), and 127 (SD 32.6), respectively. Six topics were extracted: (1) need to quit, (2) personal experiences, (3) electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes), (4) advice/success, (5) quitting as a component of general health behavior change, and (6) clinics/services. Overall, the pandemic was not associated with changes in posts about quitting; instead, New Year's resolutions and the 2019 e-cigarette or vaping use-associated lung injury (EVALI) epidemic were more plausible explanations for observed changes within and across years. Fewer second-quarter posts in 2020 for the topic e-cigarettes may reflect lower pandemic-related quitting interest, whereas fourth-quarter increases in 2020 for other topics pointed to a late-year upswing. Conclusions: Twitter posts suggest that the pandemic did not generate greater interest in quitting smoking, but possibly a decrease in motivation when the rate of infections was increasing in the second quarter of 2020. Public health authorities may wish to craft messages for specific Twitter audiences (eg, using hashtags) to motivate quitting during pandemics.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".