It appears you don't have support to open PDFs in this web browser. To view this file, Open with your PDF reader
Abstract
Opioid poisoning mortality is a substantial public health crisis in the United States, with opioids involved in approximately 75% of the nearly 1 million drug related deaths since 1999. Research suggests that the epidemic is driven by both over-prescribing and social and psychological determinants such as economic stability, hopelessness, and isolation. Hindering this research is a lack of measurements of these social and psychological constructs at fine-grained spatial and temporal resolutions. To address this issue, we use a multi-modal data set consisting of natural language from Twitter, psychometric self-reports of depression and well-being, and traditional area-based measures of socio-demographics and health-related risk factors. Unlike previous work using social media data, we do not rely on opioid or substance related keywords to track community poisonings. Instead, we leverage a large, open vocabulary of thousands of words in order to fully characterize communities suffering from opioid poisoning, using a sample of 1.5 billion tweets from 6 million U.S. county mapped Twitter users. Results show that Twitter language predicted opioid poisoning mortality better than factors relating to socio-demographics, access to healthcare, physical pain, and psychological well-being. Additionally, risk factors revealed by the Twitter language analysis included negative emotions, discussions of long work hours, and boredom, whereas protective factors included resilience, travel/leisure, and positive emotions, dovetailing with results from the psychometric self-report data. The results show that natural language from public social media can be used as a surveillance tool for both predicting community opioid poisonings and understanding the dynamic social and psychological nature of the epidemic.
You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer
Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer
Details
1 Intramural Research Program, National Institute on Drug Abuse, Baltimore, USA (GRID:grid.419475.a) (ISNI:0000 0000 9372 4913); University of Pennsylvania, Department of Computer and Information Science, Philadelphia, USA (GRID:grid.25879.31) (ISNI:0000 0004 1936 8972)
2 Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Baltimore, USA (GRID:grid.21107.35) (ISNI:0000 0001 2171 9311)
3 Stanford University, Department of Psychology, Stanford, USA (GRID:grid.168010.e) (ISNI:0000000419368956); Stanford University, Institute for Human-Centered AI, Stanford, USA (GRID:grid.168010.e) (ISNI:0000000419368956)
4 University of Pennsylvania, Department of Computer and Information Science, Philadelphia, USA (GRID:grid.25879.31) (ISNI:0000 0004 1936 8972)
5 Stony Brook University, Department of Computer Science, Stony Brook, USA (GRID:grid.36425.36) (ISNI:0000 0001 2216 9681)
6 Intramural Research Program, National Institute on Drug Abuse, Baltimore, USA (GRID:grid.419475.a) (ISNI:0000 0000 9372 4913)