@文章{info:doi/10.2196/14554，作者=“Vehof, Hans and Heerdink, Eibert and Sanders, Jos{\'e} and Das, Enny”，标题=“基于网络的糖尿病新闻特征与读者情绪之间的关系:荷兰的观察研究”，期刊=“J Med Internet Res”，年=“2019”，月=“11”，日=“13”，卷=“21”，数=“11”，页=“e14554”，关键词=“医学新闻;糖尿病;信息寻求行为;新闻;背景:尽管专家们一致认为，基于网络的健康信息经常包含对科学的夸大和歪曲，但尚不清楚这些信息如何影响读者的情绪。目的:本研究旨在调查网络糖尿病研究新闻的特定方面是否与读者的积极或消极情绪相关。方法:对Facebook页面上关于糖尿病研究新闻的评论进行回顾性观察研究，将其作为创新的发展阶段、预期的治疗效果和使用强硬语言强化新闻消息的功能进行。调查数据来自2014年1月至2018年1月期间在荷兰两个最大的糖尿病Facebook页面上发布的糖尿病研究新闻和相应的读者评论。通过手动编码这些Facebook用户的评论，三个二元结果变量被创建出来，反映积极情绪的存在，消极情绪的存在，以及表达希望的声明的存在。结果:Facebook用户在173篇糖尿病研究新闻文章中总共发表了3710条评论，这些评论符合进一步分析的条件。 Facebook user comments on posts about diabetes prevention (odds ratio [OR] 0.55, 95{\%} CI 0.37-0.84), improved blood glucose regulation (OR 0.68, 95{\%} CI 0.56-0.84), and symptom relief (OR 0.31, 95{\%} CI 0.21-0.44) were associated with less positive sentiments as compared with potential diabetes cures. Furthermore, comments on innovations supported by preclinical evidence in animals were associated with more positive sentiments (OR 1.46, 95{\%} CI 1.07-1.99) and statements expressing hope (OR 1.47, 95{\%} CI 1.01-2.14), when compared with innovations that have evidence from large human trials. This study found no evidence for the associations between language intensification of the news posts and the readers' sentiments. Conclusions: Our finding that the attitudes toward diabetes research news on Facebook are most positive when clinical efficacy is not (or not yet) proven in large patient trials suggests that news authors and editors, as well as medical professionals, must exercise caution when acting as a conduit for diabetes research news. ", issn="1438-8871", doi="10.2196/14554", url="//www.mybigtv.com/2019/11/e14554", url="https://doi.org/10.2196/14554", url="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31719025" }