In make contact with with other nations, if at all. This pattern of interactions creates homogeneous subnetworks where new suggestions aren’t becoming exchanged, and nations with similar opinions only communicate with other people that already share their beliefs. To test this, we performed a very simple linear regression evaluation to examine if the difference in sentiment involving ecigarette topics and all other topics may be predicted by closeness centrality. The significance in the results suggests that the peripheral countries have significantly much more unfavorable e-cigarette discussions than core nations, confirming our visual findings for RQ2. A extra content-sensitive view of your subjects and messages appeared to assist clarify some of the differencesTable 3 12 isolated threads, including information on poster nation, subject and sentiment score Thread Nation 8475 15 055 11 011 Israel Summarised message topic Sentiment 0.0526 -0.0135 -0.012 -0.0112 -0.0056 0.0201 0.0202 0 0.0034 -0.Table 2 Top 12 threads based on betweenness, including information on topic and sentiment Summarised Thread message topic 8324 6 13 022 6467 9236 10 772 14 746 15 596 9381 11 054 11 960 8504 Asking for information Basic info Common information Industry packaging Asking for information Health information Health information Health info Country bans of e-cigarettes Betweenness Sentiment 0.0415165 0.0341207 0.0266851 0.0219485 0.0203558 0.0203558 0.0203558 0.0203558 0.0153913 0.0153913 0.0136741 0.0131022 0.0148 0.0214 0.01872 0.032 0.0038 0.01753 0.04325 0.00435 0.0216 0.03243 0.02022 -0.11 349 13 648 15 696 15 695 10 304 10 30611General e-cigarette C-DIM12 queries Greece (topic) Japan Alternative smoke-free to e-cigarettes in Japan Japan E-cigarette firm in Japan Luxembourg European Union policy discussion Luxembourg (subject) Luxembourg (subject) Chile (topic) Chile (topic) Pakistan E-cigarettes in Pakistan, concerns on harm reduction Romania Queries on regulating e-cigarettes Malaysia Queries on `stealth’ e-cigarettes-0.Chu K-H, et al. BMJ Open 2015;5:e007654. doi:10.1136bmjopen-2015-Open AccessTable four Ranks of ten countries based on distinction in sentiment scores involving e-cigarette subjects and all other topics Country Pakistan Malaysia Japan Colombia Ireland UK Australia USA Switzerland Canada Rank 1 2 3 4 5 16 18 19 22 33 E-cigarette sentiment -0.0476 -0.0273 -0.0116 -0.0333 0.005 0.00909773 0.01133333 0.00845785 0.01335641 0.00868673 All other sentiment 0.00273953 0.02150714 0.03651304 0.01004545 0.03818923 0.02349269 0.02331831 0.01930207 0.00450547 0.00804523 Difference -0.05033953 -0.04880714 -0.04811304 -0.04334545 -0.03318923 -0.01439496 -0.01198498 -0.01084422 +0.00885094 +0.Leading 5 have the highest difference in sentiment scores. Bottom five are countries central in the network.in other-country responses. Of the 12 subjects with the highest betweenness (table two), 9 have been focused on ecigarettes generally, while three had been location certain. By contrast, within the 
12 isolated topics (table 3), over 50 (7) were certain to either a place (eg, Japan, Argentina, Europe, Pakistan) or context (eg, US military). This may very well be on account of every single nation obtaining PubMed ID:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21330032 extremely diverse laws concerning tobacco control and e-cigarette use. These differences are much less `open for debate,’ although information and facts on e-cigarette usage, wellness and also other location-neutral subjects have additional room for discussion. It really is also crucial to view the outcomes of your analyses in a broader view, and understanding the difference in attitudes outside the network context.