ArticleJMIR public health and surveillance2016
Evaluating Google, Twitter, and Wikipedia as Tools for Influenza Surveillance Using Bayesian Change Point Analysis: A Comparative Analysis.
Article in JMIR public health and surveillance, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 39 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
39 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Social media based surveillance systems for healthcare using machine learning: A systematic review.Journal of biomedical informatics · 2020Pooled it
- The Application of Internet-Based Sources for Public Health Surveillance (Infoveillance): Systematic Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2020Pooled it
- Early Detection Intervals for Evaluating Event-Based Surveillance System: Reference Dataset Development Study.JMIR public health and surveillance · 2026Article
- Early Warning of Infectious Disease Outbreaks Using Social Media and Digital Data: A Scoping Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2025Article
- Use of Large Language Models to Assess the Likelihood of Epidemics From the Content of Tweets: Infodemiology Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2024Article
- Global Variations in Event-Based Surveillance for Disease Outbreak Detection: Time Series Analysis.JMIR public health and surveillance · 2022Article
- Digital Marketing: A Unique Multidisciplinary Approach towards the Elimination of Viral Hepatitis.Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Real-Time Detection of Flu Season Onset: A Novel Approach to Flu Surveillance.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Role of Participatory Health Informatics in Detecting and Managing Pandemics: Literature Review.Yearbook of medical informatics · 2021Review
- Suggestion of a simpler and faster influenza-like illness surveillance system using 2014-2018 claims data in Korea.Scientific reports · 2021Article
- Correlation between flu and Wikipedia's pages visualization.Acta bio-medica : Atenei Parmensis · 2021Article
- Examining the Correlation of Google Influenza Trend with Hospital Data: Retrospective Study.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2021Article
- Influenza forecasting for French regions combining EHR, web and climatic data sources with a machine learning ensemble approach.PloS one · 2021Article
- Predicting regional influenza epidemics with uncertainty estimation using commuting data in Japan.PloS one · 2021Article
- Googling for Ticks and Borreliosis in Germany: Nationwide Google Search Analysis From 2015 to 2018.Journal of medical Internet research · 2020Article
- A scoping review of the use of Twitter for public health research.Computers in biology and medicine · 2020Article
- Infodemiology and Infoveillance: Scoping Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2020Article
- Situating Wikipedia as a health information resource in various contexts: A scoping review.PloS one · 2020Article
- Ideas for how informaticians can get involved with COVID-19 research.BioData mining · 2020Article
- Robust two-stage influenza prediction model considering regular and irregular trends.PloS one · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTraditional influenza surveillance relies on influenza-like illness (ILI) syndrome that is reported by health care providers. It primarily captures individuals who seek medical care and misses those who do not. Recently, Web-based data sources have been studied for application to public health surveillance, as there is a growing number of people who search, post, and tweet about their illnesses before seeking medical care. Existing research has shown some promise of using data from Google, Twitter, and Wikipedia to complement traditional surveillance for ILI. However, past studies have evaluated these Web-based sources individually or dually without comparing all 3 of them, and it would be beneficial to know which of the Web-based sources performs best in order to be considered to complement traditional methods.
objectiveThe objective of this study is to comparatively analyze Google, Twitter, and Wikipedia by examining which best corresponds with Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) ILI data. It was hypothesized that Wikipedia will best correspond with CDC ILI data as previous research found it to be least influenced by high media coverage in comparison with Google and Twitter.
methodsPublicly available, deidentified data were collected from the CDC, Google Flu Trends, HealthTweets, and Wikipedia for the 2012-2015 influenza seasons. Bayesian change point analysis was used to detect seasonal changes, or change points, in each of the data sources. Change points in Google, Twitter, and Wikipedia that occurred during the exact week, 1 preceding week, or 1 week after the CDC's change points were compared with the CDC data as the gold standard. All analyses were conducted using the R package "bcp" version 4.0.0 in RStudio version 0.99.484 (RStudio Inc). In addition, sensitivity and positive predictive values (PPV) were calculated for Google, Twitter, and Wikipedia.
resultsDuring the 2012-2015 influenza seasons, a high sensitivity of 92% was found for Google, whereas the PPV for Google was 85%. A low sensitivity of 50% was calculated for Twitter; a low PPV of 43% was found for Twitter also. Wikipedia had the lowest sensitivity of 33% and lowest PPV of 40%.
conclusionsOf the 3 Web-based sources, Google had the best combination of sensitivity and PPV in detecting Bayesian change points in influenza-related data streams. Findings demonstrated that change points in Google, Twitter, and Wikipedia data occasionally aligned well with change points captured in CDC ILI data, yet these sources did not detect all changes in CDC data and should be further studied and developed.
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.