↓ Skip to main content

Twitter Improves Influenza Forecasting

Overview of attention for article published in PLoS Currents, January 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (93rd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (82nd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
15 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Readers on

mendeley
188 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
Twitter Improves Influenza Forecasting
Published in
PLoS Currents, January 2014
DOI 10.1371/currents.outbreaks.90b9ed0f59bae4ccaa683a39865d9117
Pubmed ID
Authors

Michael J Paul, Mark Dredze, David Broniatowski

Abstract

Accurate disease forecasts are imperative when preparing for influenza epidemic outbreaks; nevertheless, these forecasts are often limited by the time required to collect new, accurate data. In this paper, we show that data from the microblogging community Twitter significantly improves influenza forecasting. Most prior influenza forecast models are tested against historical influenza-like illness (ILI) data from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). These data are released with a one-week lag and are often initially inaccurate until the CDC revises them weeks later. Since previous studies utilize the final, revised data in evaluation, their evaluations do not properly determine the effectiveness of forecasting. Our experiments using ILI data available at the time of the forecast show that models incorporating data derived from Twitter can reduce forecasting error by 17-30% over a baseline that only uses historical data. For a given level of accuracy, using Twitter data produces forecasts that are two to four weeks ahead of baseline models. Additionally, we find that models using Twitter data are, on average, better predictors of influenza prevalence than are models using data from Google Flu Trends, the leading web data source.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 15 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 188 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 5 3%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Poland 1 <1%
Unknown 181 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 47 25%
Student > Master 26 14%
Researcher 23 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 10 5%
Student > Bachelor 9 5%
Other 31 16%
Unknown 42 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Computer Science 38 20%
Medicine and Dentistry 25 13%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 10 5%
Engineering 10 5%
Mathematics 8 4%
Other 40 21%
Unknown 57 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 19. 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 13 March 2020.
All research outputs
#1,956,243
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from PLoS Currents
#75
of 436 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#21,664
of 319,271 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLoS Currents
#12
of 68 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 436 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 18.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% 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 319,271 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 68 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.