MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4360616884 · doi:10.3389/fpubh.2023.1130079

Ethical principles for infodemiology and infoveillance studies concerning infodemic management on social media

2023· article· en· W4360616884 on OpenAlexaff
Matheus Lotto, Thokozani Hanjahanja-Phiri, Halyna Padalko, Arlene Oetomo, Zahid A Butt, Jennifer Boger, Jason Millar, Thiago Cruvinel, Plinio Pelegrini Morita

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Public Health · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMisinformation and Its Impacts
Canadian institutionsResearch Institute for AgingUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health NetworkUniversity of OttawaPublic Health OntarioUniversity of Waterloo
FundersFundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo
KeywordsMisinformationSocial mediaPerspective (graphical)Engineering ethicsBig dataInternet privacyData sciencePublic relationsKnowledge managementComputer sciencePolitical scienceWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Big data originating from user interactions on social media play an essential role in infodemiology and infoveillance outcomes, supporting the planning and implementation of public health actions. Notably, the extrapolation of these data requires an awareness of different ethical elements. Previous studies have investigated and discussed the adoption of conventional ethical approaches in the contemporary public health digital surveillance space. However, there is a lack of specific ethical guidelines to orient infodemiology and infoveillance studies concerning infodemic on social media, making it challenging to design digital strategies to combat this phenomenon. Hence, it is necessary to explore if traditional ethical pillars can support digital purposes or whether new ones must be proposed since we are confronted with a complex online misinformation scenario. Therefore, this perspective provides an overview of the current scenario of ethics-related issues of infodemiology and infoveillance on social media for infodemic studies.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.608
Threshold uncertainty score0.624

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.323
GPT teacher head0.455
Teacher spread0.132 · 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

Citations22
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Public HealthSame topicMisinformation and Its ImpactsFrench-language works237,207