Paper detail

American Twitter Users Revealed Social Determinants-related Oral Health Disparities amid the COVID-19 Pandemic

Objectives: To assess self-reported population oral health conditions amid COVID-19 pandemic using user reports on Twitter. Method and Material: We collected oral health-related tweets during the COVID-19 pandemic from 9,104 Twitter users across 26 states (with sufficient samples) in the United States between November 12, 2020 and June 14, 2021. We inferred user demographics by leveraging the visual information from the user profile images. Other characteristics including income, population density, poverty rate, health insurance coverage rate, community water fluoridation rate, and relative change in the number of daily confirmed COVID-19 cases were acquired or inferred based on retrieved information from user profiles. We performed logistic regression to examine whether discussions vary across user characteristics. Results: Overall, 26.70% of the Twitter users discuss wisdom tooth pain/jaw hurt, 23.86% tweet about dental service/cavity, 18.97% discuss chipped tooth/tooth break, 16.23% talk about dental pain, and the rest are about tooth decay/gum bleeding. Women and younger adults (19-29) are more likely to talk about oral health problems. Health insurance coverage rate is the most significant predictor in logistic regression for topic prediction. Conclusion: Tweets inform social disparities in oral health during the pandemic. For instance, people from counties at a higher risk of COVID-19 talk more about tooth decay/gum bleeding and chipped tooth/tooth break. Older adults, who are vulnerable to COVID-19, are more likely to discuss dental pain. Topics of interest vary across user characteristics. Through the lens of social media, our findings may provide insights for oral health practitioners and policy makers.

preprint2022arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access4 authors2 topics

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.