Integrating Smart Health in the US Health Care System: Infodemiology Study of Asthma Monitoring in the Google Era
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: With the internet's penetration and use constantly expanding, this vast amount of information can be employed in order to better assess issues in the US health care system. Google Trends, a popular tool in big data analytics, has been widely used in the past to examine interest in various medical and health-related topics and has shown great potential in forecastings, predictions, and nowcastings. As empirical relationships between online queries and human behavior have been shown to exist, a new opportunity to explore the behavior toward asthma-a common respiratory disease-is present. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed at forecasting the online behavior toward asthma and examined the correlations between queries and reported cases in order to explore the possibility of nowcasting asthma prevalence in the United States using online search traffic data. METHODS: Applying Holt-Winters exponential smoothing to Google Trends time series from 2004 to 2015 for the term "asthma," forecasts for online queries at state and national levels are estimated from 2016 to 2020 and validated against available Google query data from January 2016 to June 2017. Correlations among yearly Google queries and between Google queries and reported asthma cases are examined. RESULTS: Our analysis shows that search queries exhibit seasonality within each year and the relationships between each 2 years' queries are statistically significant (P<.05). Estimated forecasting models for a 5-year period (2016 through 2020) for Google queries are robust and validated against available data from January 2016 to June 2017. Significant correlations were found between (1) online queries and National Health Interview Survey lifetime asthma (r=-.82, P=.001) and current asthma (r=-.77, P=.004) rates from 2004 to 2015 and (2) between online queries and Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System lifetime (r=-.78, P=.003) and current asthma (r=-.79, P=.002) rates from 2004 to 2014. The correlations are negative, but lag analysis to identify the period of response cannot be employed until short-interval data on asthma prevalence are made available. CONCLUSIONS: Online behavior toward asthma can be accurately predicted, and significant correlations between online queries and reported cases exist. This method of forecasting Google queries can be used by health care officials to nowcast asthma prevalence by city, state, or nationally, subject to future availability of daily, weekly, or monthly data on reported cases. This method could therefore be used for improved monitoring and assessment of the needs surrounding the current population of patients with asthma.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.009 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".