ArticleBMJ open2015
The utility of Google Trends data to examine interest in cancer screening.
Article in BMJ open, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 63 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
63 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Assessing the Methods, Tools, and Statistical Approaches in Google Trends Research: Systematic Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2018Pooled it
- Temporal and geographic patterns of breast cancer-related google search activity and its association with CDC-reported incidence in the United States (2005-2023).Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2026Article
- Infertility trends in China: analyzing temporal changes, public demand, and demographic differences based on Baidu index.BMC public health · 2025Article
- Online Interest in Colorectal Cancer Screening in Florida.Southern medical journal · 2025Article
- Article
- Inequity of NIH cancer funding in the United States: an ecological study predicting funding based on disease burden from 2008 through 2023.Lancet regional health. Americas · 2025Article
- Breast Cancer Screening Participation and Internet Search Activity in a Japanese Population: Decade-Long Time-Series Study.JMIR cancer · 2025Article
- The evolution of public attention in acute kidney injury and continuous renal replacement therapy: trends analysis from 2004 to 2024.Frontiers in nephrology · 2024Article
- Interest in mammography across European countries: a retrospective "Google Trends" comparative study.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2023Article
- Article
- The time trend of information seeking behavior about salt reduction using Google Trends: infodemiological study in Japan.Hypertension research : official journal of the Japanese Society of Hypertension · 2023Article
- Implications of Public Interest in Colonoscopy: Analysis of Google Trends Data From 12 European Countries.Cureus · 2023Article
- Can we interrogate public databases to fill critical gaps in mental health epidemiology? Testing the association between cannabis and psychosis in the UK as an example.Epidemiology and psychiatric sciences · 2023Article
- Impact of COVID-19 on Public Interest in Breast Cancer Screening and Related Symptoms: Google Trends Analysis.JMIR cancer · 2023Article
- Global Online Interest in HIV/AIDS care Services in the time of COVID-19: A Google Trends Analysis.AIDS and behavior · 2023Article
- Online Search Patterns about Vaccination: A National Study.Portuguese journal of public health · 2023Article
- Real-Time Monitoring of Infectious Disease Outbreaks with a Combination of Google Trends Search Results and the Moving Epidemic Method: A Respiratory Syncytial Virus Case Study.Tropical medicine and infectious disease · 2023Article
- Mining Google Trends data for nowcasting and forecasting colorectal cancer (CRC) prevalence.PeerJ. Computer science · 2023Article
- Explanation of hand, foot, and mouth disease cases in Japan using Google Trends before and during the COVID-19: infodemiology study.BMC infectious diseases · 2022Article
- Worldwide Evolution of Vaccinable and Nonvaccinable Viral Skin Infections: Google Trends Analysis.JMIR dermatology · 2022Article
3 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesWe examined the utility of January 2004 to April 2014 Google Trends data from information searches for cancer screenings and preparations as a complement to population screening data, which are traditionally estimated through costly population-level surveys.
settingState-level data across the USA.
participantsPersons who searched for terms related to cancer screening using Google, and persons who participated in the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS). PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: (1) State-level Google Trends data, providing relative search volume (RSV) data scaled to the highest search proportion per week (RSV100) for search terms over time since 2004 and across different geographical locations. (2) RSV of new screening tests, free/low-cost screening for breast and colorectal cancer, and new preparations for colonoscopy (Prepopik). (3) State-level breast, cervical, colorectal and prostate cancer screening rates.
resultsCorrelations between Google Trends and BRFSS data ranged from 0.55 for ever having had a colonoscopy to 0.14 for having a Pap smear within the past 3 years. Free/low-cost mammography and colonoscopy showed higher RSV during their respective cancer awareness months. RSV for Miralax remained stable, while interest in Prepopik increased over time. RSV for lung cancer screening, virtual colonoscopy and three-dimensional mammography was low.
conclusionsGoogle Trends data provides enormous scientific possibilities, but are not a suitable substitute for, but may complement, traditional data collection and analysis about cancer screening and related interests.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.