Background: Previous research has shown that articles may be cited more frequently on the basis of title or abstract positivity. Whether a similar selective sharing practice exists on Twitter is not well understood. The objective of this study was to assess if COVID-19 articles with positive titles or abstracts were tweeted more frequently than those with non-positive titles or abstracts. Methods: COVID-19 related articles published between January 1st and April 14th, 2020 were extracted from the LitCovid database and all articles were screened for eligibility. Titles and abstracts were classified using a list of positive and negative words from a previous study. A negative binomial regression analysis controlling for confounding variables (2018 impact factor, open access status, continent of the corresponding author, and topic) was performed to obtain regression coefficients, with the p values obtained by likelihood ratio testing. Results: A total of 3752 COVID-19 articles were included. Of the included studies, 44 titles and 112 abstracts were positive; 1 title and 7 abstracts were negative; and 3707 titles and 627 abstracts were neutral. Articles with positive titles had a lower tweet rate relative to articles with non-positive titles, with a regression coefficient of -1.10 (P < .001), while the positivity of the abstract did not impact tweet rate (P = .2218). Conclusion: COVID-19 articles with non-positive titles are preferentially tweeted, while abstract positivity does not influence tweet rate.
Selective tweeting of COVID-19 articles: Does title or abstract positivity influence dissemination?