ABSTRACT
In this study, the authors analyzed 147 AAHSL member libraries' COVID-19 research guides to determine the volume and origin of links included. Through stratified sampling based on total enrollment of health sciences academic institutions, 51 eligible AASHL library websites were selected for inclusion in the study. Content from COVID-19 research guides was analyzed, and the origin of each link was categorized. Most AAHSL libraries have at least one COVID-19 research guide, while some have two or more. A total of 8,848 links within examined research guides were visited. Links to academic institutions including universities' own internal links were most common while news outlets, social media, and international government were linked least. Regarding individual organizations, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the National Institutes of Health (NIH)were most frequently linked. The overwhelming majority of sampled health sciences libraries use research guides to share COVID-19 information with their users. It is necessary to further investigate how libraries can optimize research guides to benefit their users. These results and conclusions reveal information resource patterns in research guides at health sciences academic libraries and are consistent with those reached by researchers investigating academic libraries' research guides in 2020.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Libraries, Medical , Social Media , HumansABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: During the COVID-19 pandemic, US public health authorities and county, state, and federal governments recommended or ordered certain preventative practices, such as wearing masks, to reduce the spread of the disease. However, individuals had divergent reactions to these preventive practices. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to understand the variations in public sentiment toward COVID-19 and the recommended or ordered preventive practices from the temporal and spatial perspectives, as well as how the variations in public sentiment are related to geographical and socioeconomic factors. METHODS: The authors leveraged machine learning methods to investigate public sentiment polarity in COVID-19-related tweets from January 21, 2020 to June 12, 2020. The study measured the temporal variations and spatial disparities in public sentiment toward both general COVID-19 topics and preventive practices in the United States. RESULTS: In the temporal analysis, we found a 4-stage pattern from high negative sentiment in the initial stage to decreasing and low negative sentiment in the second and third stages, to the rebound and increase in negative sentiment in the last stage. We also identified that public sentiment to preventive practices was significantly different in urban and rural areas, while poverty rate and unemployment rate were positively associated with negative sentiment to COVID-19 issues. CONCLUSIONS: The differences between public sentiment toward COVID-19 and the preventive practices imply that actions need to be taken to manage the initial and rebound stages in future pandemics. The urban and rural differences should be considered in terms of the communication strategies and decision making during a pandemic. This research also presents a framework to investigate time-sensitive public sentiment at the county and state levels, which could guide local and state governments and regional communities in making decisions and developing policies in crises.