↓ Skip to main content

Representing vaccine misinformation using ontologies

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Biomedical Semantics, August 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (66th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (60th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
88 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Representing vaccine misinformation using ontologies
Published in
Journal of Biomedical Semantics, August 2018
DOI 10.1186/s13326-018-0190-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Muhammad Amith, Cui Tao

Abstract

In this paper, we discuss the design and development of a formal ontology to describe misinformation about vaccines. Vaccine misinformation is one of the drivers leading to vaccine hesitancy in patients. While there are various levels of vaccine hesitancy to combat and specific interventions to address those levels, it is important to have tools that help researchers understand this problem. With an ontology, not only can we collect and analyze varied misunderstandings about vaccines, but we can also develop tools that can provide informatics solutions. We developed the Vaccine Misinformation Ontology (VAXMO) that extends the Misinformation Ontology and links to the nanopublication Resource Description Framework (RDF) model for false assertions of vaccines. Preliminary assessment using semiotic evaluation metrics indicated adequate quality for our ontology. We outlined and demonstrated proposed uses of the ontology to detect and understand anti-vaccine information. We surmised that VAXMO and its proposed use cases can support tools and technology that can pave the way for vaccine misinformation detection and analysis. Using an ontology, we can formally structure knowledge for machines and software to better understand the vaccine misinformation domain.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 88 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 88 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 14%
Student > Master 11 13%
Other 7 8%
Researcher 7 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 7%
Other 20 23%
Unknown 25 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Computer Science 19 22%
Social Sciences 10 11%
Medicine and Dentistry 9 10%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 3%
Other 15 17%
Unknown 29 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 30 June 2021.
All research outputs
#6,382,341
of 23,102,082 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Biomedical Semantics
#116
of 366 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#112,316
of 335,278 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Biomedical Semantics
#2
of 5 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,102,082 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 366 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 335,278 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 3 of them.