Worldwide Evolution of Vaccinable and Nonvaccinable Viral Skin Infections: Google Trends Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Most common viral skin infections are not reportable conditions. Studying the population dynamics of these viral epidemics using traditional field methods is costly and time-consuming, especially over wide geographical areas. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to explore the evolution, seasonality, and distribution of vaccinable and nonvaccinable viral skin infections through an analysis of Google Trends. METHODS: Worldwide search trends from January 2004 through May 2021 for viral skin infections were extracted from Google Trends, quantified, and analyzed. RESULTS: Time series decomposition showed that the total search term volume for warts; zoster; roseola; measles; hand, foot, and mouth disease (HFMD); varicella; and rubella increased worldwide over the study period, whereas the interest for Pityriasis rosea and herpes simplex decreased. Internet searches for HFMD, varicella, and measles exhibited the highest seasonal patterns. The interest for measles and rubella was more pronounced in African countries, whereas the interest for HFMD and roseola was more pronounced in East Asia. CONCLUSIONS: Harnessing data generated by web searches may increase the efficacy of traditional surveillance systems and strengthens the suspicion that the incidence of some vaccinable viral skin infections such as varicella, measles, and rubella may be globally increasing, whereas the incidence of common nonvaccinable skin infections remains stable.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.010 | 0.013 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".