Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39207842›Full record

ArticleJMIR infodemiology2024

Large Language Models Can Enable Inductive Thematic Analysis of a Social Media Corpus in a Single Prompt: Human Validation Study.

Michael S Deiner, Vlad Honcharov, Jiawei Li, Tim K Mackey, Travis C Porco, Urmimala Sarkar

Abstract readValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR infodemiology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

19 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Michael S Deiner *Department of Ophthalmology and Francis I Proctor Foundation, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-4977-6147
Vlad Honcharov *Center for Vulnerable Populations, Zuckerberg San Francisco General Hospital, Department of Medicine, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-6045-6515
Jiawei LiS-3 Research, LLC, San Diego, CA, United States.ORCID 0000-0001-9801-4715
Tim K MackeyS-3 Research, LLC, San Diego, CA, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-2191-7833
Travis C PorcoDepartments of Ophthalmology, Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Global Health Sciences, and Francis I Proctor Foundation, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, United States.ORCID 0000-0001-8813-3171
Urmimala SarkarCenter for Vulnerable Populations, Zuckerberg San Francisco General Hospital, Department of Medicine, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, United States.ORCID 0000-0003-4213-4405

Funding

Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality.NCI NIH HHSNIDA NIH HHS
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundManually analyzing public health-related content from social media provides valuable insights into the beliefs, attitudes, and behaviors of individuals, shedding light on trends and patterns that can inform public understanding, policy decisions, targeted interventions, and communication strategies. Unfortunately, the time and effort needed from well-trained human subject matter experts makes extensive manual social media listening unfeasible. Generative large language models (LLMs) can potentially summarize and interpret large amounts of text, but it is unclear to what extent LLMs can glean subtle health-related meanings in large sets of social media posts and reasonably report health-related themes.

objectiveWe aimed to assess the feasibility of using LLMs for topic model selection or inductive thematic analysis of large contents of social media posts by attempting to answer the following question: Can LLMs conduct topic model selection and inductive thematic analysis as effectively as humans did in a prior manual study, or at least reasonably, as judged by subject matter experts?

methodsWe asked the same research question and used the same set of social media content for both the LLM selection of relevant topics and the LLM analysis of themes as was conducted manually in a published study about vaccine rhetoric. We used the results from that study as background for this LLM experiment by comparing the results from the prior manual human analyses with the analyses from 3 LLMs: GPT4-32K, Claude-instant-100K, and Claude-2-100K. We also assessed if multiple LLMs had equivalent ability and assessed the consistency of repeated analysis from each LLM.

resultsThe LLMs generally gave high rankings to the topics chosen previously by humans as most relevant. We reject a null hypothesis (P<.001, overall comparison) and conclude that these LLMs are more likely to include the human-rated top 5 content areas in their top rankings than would occur by chance. Regarding theme identification, LLMs identified several themes similar to those identified by humans, with very low hallucination rates. Variability occurred between LLMs and between test runs of an individual LLM. Despite not consistently matching the human-generated themes, subject matter experts found themes generated by the LLMs were still reasonable and relevant.

conclusionsLLMs can effectively and efficiently process large social media-based health-related data sets. LLMs can extract themes from such data that human subject matter experts deem reasonable. However, we were unable to show that the LLMs we tested can replicate the depth of analysis from human subject matter experts by consistently extracting the same themes from the same data. There is vast potential, once better validated, for automated LLM-based real-time social listening for common and rare health conditions, informing public health understanding of the public's interests and concerns and determining the public's ideas to address them.

Indexed as

Social MediaHumansNatural Language ProcessingClaudeCOVID-19generative large language modelgenerative pretrained transformerGPTinductive content analysisinfodemiologysocial mediaTwittervaccine hesitancyX formerly known as Twitter

Identifiers

PMID39207842
PMCPMC11393503

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.