Analysis of Fluoride-Free Content on Twitter: Topic Modeling Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Although social media has the potential to spread misinformation, it can also be a valuable tool for elucidating the social factors that contribute to the onset of negative beliefs. As a result, data mining has become a widely used technique in infodemiology and infoveillance research to combat misinformation effects. On the other hand, there is a lack of studies that specifically aim to investigate misinformation about fluoride on Twitter. Web-based individual concerns on the side effects of fluoridated oral care products and tap water stimulate the emergence and propagation of convictions that boost antifluoridation activism. In this sense, a previous content analysis-driven study demonstrated that the term fluoride-free was frequently associated with antifluoridation interests. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to analyze "fluoride-free" tweets regarding their topics and frequency of publication over time. METHODS: A total of 21,169 tweets published in English between May 2016 and May 2022 that included the keyword "fluoride-free" were retrieved by the Twitter application programming interface. Latent Dirichlet allocation (LDA) topic modeling was applied to identify the salient terms and topics. The similarity between topics was calculated through an intertopic distance map. Moreover, an investigator manually assessed a sample of tweets depicting each of the most representative word groups that determined specific issues. Lastly, additional data visualization was performed regarding the total count of each topic of fluoride-free record and its relevance over time, using Elastic Stack software. RESULTS: We identified 3 issues by applying the LDA topic modeling: "healthy lifestyle" (topic 1), "consumption of natural/organic oral care products" (topic 2), and "recommendations for using fluoride-free products/measures" (topic 3). Topic 1 was related to users' concerns about leading a healthier lifestyle and the potential impacts of fluoride consumption, including its hypothetical toxicity. Complementarily, topic 2 was associated with users' personal interests and perceptions of consuming natural and organic fluoride-free oral care products, whereas topic 3 was linked to users' recommendations for using fluoride-free products (eg, switching from fluoridated toothpaste to fluoride-free alternatives) and measures (eg, consuming unfluoridated bottled water instead of fluoridated tap water), comprising the propaganda of dental products. Additionally, the count of tweets on fluoride-free content decreased between 2016 and 2019 but increased again from 2020 onward. CONCLUSIONS: Public concerns toward a healthy lifestyle, including the adoption of natural and organic cosmetics, seem to be the main motivation of the recent increase of "fluoride-free" tweets, which can be boosted by the propagation of fluoride falsehoods on the web. Therefore, public health authorities, health professionals, and legislators should be aware of the spread of fluoride-free content on social media to create and implement strategies against their potential health damage for the population.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".