The Influence of Geographic Factors on Information Dissemination in Mobile Social Networks in China: Evidence from WeChat

Analysis of the Evolution of User Emotion and Opinion Leaders' Information Dissemination Behavior in the Knowledge Q&A Community during COVID-19

Since its emergence in 2019, COVID-19 has quickly triggered widespread public discussion on social media. From 26 February 2020 to 26 September 2020, this study collected data on COVID-19-related posts in the knowledge Q&A community, identified 220 opinion leaders of this community, and used social network analysis and sentiment analysis to analyze the information exchange behavior and emotional evolution of the opinion leaders during COVID-19. The results show that the COVID-19 topic community could be divided into seven main categories. The information dissemination of opinion leader information dissemination network had low efficiency, multiple paths, and a high degree of control. In addition, the emotional evolution of users showed obvious phased characteristics. User emotion changed from initially strong negative to strong positive over the course of the pandemic and eventually tended to be objective and neutral as time passed and the event stabilized.

Why is misdiagnosis more likely among some people with rare diseases than others? Insights from a population-based cross-sectional study in China

Background

For patients with rare diseases (RD), misdiagnosis (or erroneous diagnosis) is one of the key issues that hinder RD patients’ accessibility to timely treatment. Yet, little is known about the main factors that are associated with RD patients’ misdiagnosis. The objective of this study is to analyze data from a national survey among 2040 RD patients from China to explore the association between misdiagnosis and various factors, including patients’ demographics, socio-economic status, medical history, and their accessibility to RD information.

Results

Three binary logistic regression analyses were performed to assess the relationships between misdiagnosis and level of rarity of the RDs (mild, moderate, and severe), demographics, health insurance levels, and accessibility to disease-related information by using the total sample, and the adult and non-adult sub-samples. We found that accessibility to RD information is the most critical factor influencing the patients’ chances of being misdiagnosed (odds ratio [OR] = 4.459, p < 0.001). In other words, the greater the difficulty in accessing the information on RD management, the higher the possibility of experiencing misdiagnosis.

Such influences of information accessibility on misdiagnosis were repeatedly discovered when examining the adult (OR = 3.732, p < 0.001) and the non-adult (OR = 5.174, p < 0.001) sub-samples. The association between perceived economic status and misdiagnosis was only significant in the total sample. The only other factor significantly associated with misdiagnosis was disease multimorbidity: participants who reported no multimorbidity are less likely to experience misdiagnosis (OR = 0.42, p < 0.001).

Conclusions

Our study indicated that patients with RDs who have difficulty in accessing disease-related information are two to five times more likely to have experienced misdiagnosis. Even after adjusting for the patients’ age, gender, economic levels, and education levels, the impact of information accessibility was still significant. Our finding highlights the importance of access to information in reducing misdiagnosis among RD patients.