In contact with other countries, if at all. This pattern of interactions creates homogeneous subnetworks exactly where new tips usually are not being exchanged, and countries with comparable opinions only communicate with others that already share their beliefs. To test this, we conducted a very simple linear regression analysis to examine when the distinction in sentiment involving ecigarette topics and all other topics might be predicted by closeness centrality. The significance of the final results suggests that the peripheral nations have drastically a lot more negative e-cigarette discussions than core countries, confirming our visual findings for RQ2. A far more content-sensitive view of the topics and messages appeared to help clarify some of the differencesTable 3 12 isolated threads, including facts on poster country, 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 two Leading 12 threads primarily based on betweenness, including data on topic and sentiment Summarised Thread message topic 8324 6 13 022 6467 9236 ten 772 14 746 15 596 9381 11 054 11 960 8504 Asking for info Basic info Basic information Market packaging Asking for information Health info Overall health information Overall health info Country bans of e-cigarettes Betweenness Sentiment 0.0415165 0.APS-2-79 site 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 ten 304 ten 30611General e-cigarette concerns Greece (subject) Japan Option smoke-free to e-cigarettes in Japan Japan E-cigarette enterprise in Japan Luxembourg European Union policy discussion Luxembourg (subject) Luxembourg (topic) Chile (subject) Chile (subject) Pakistan E-cigarettes in Pakistan, queries on harm reduction Romania Queries on regulating e-cigarettes Malaysia Questions on `stealth’ e-cigarettes-0.Chu K-H, et al. BMJ Open 2015;5:e007654. doi:10.1136bmjopen-2015-Open AccessTable four Ranks of 10 countries based on distinction in sentiment scores amongst e-cigarette topics and all other subjects Country Pakistan Malaysia Japan Colombia Ireland UK Australia USA Switzerland Canada Rank 1 2 three 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 Distinction -0.05033953 -0.04880714 -0.04811304 -0.04334545 -0.03318923 -0.01439496 -0.01198498 -0.01084422 +0.00885094 +0.Best 5 possess the highest distinction in sentiment scores. Bottom five are nations central in the network.in other-country responses. Of the 12 subjects together with the highest betweenness (table 2), 9 had been focused on ecigarettes normally, even though 3 had been place particular. By contrast, within the 12 isolated topics (table three), more than 50 (7) have been distinct to either a place (eg, Japan, Argentina, Europe, Pakistan) or context (eg, US military). This may very well be as a consequence of each country possessing PubMed ID:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21330032 pretty distinctive laws regarding tobacco manage and e-cigarette use. These differences are less `open for debate,’ while data on e-cigarette usage, overall health and other location-neutral topics have more area for discussion. It truly is also critical to view the outcomes with the analyses inside a broader view, and understanding the distinction in attitudes outdoors the network context.