Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31608195›Full record

ArticleCureus2019

Google Search Trends in Oncology and the Impact of Celebrity Cancer Awareness.

Tasneem Kaleem, Timothy D Malouff, William C Stross, Mark R Waddle, Daniel H Miller, Audrey L Seymour, Nicholas G Zaorsky, Robert C Miller, Daniel M Trifiletti, Laura Vallow

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cureus, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
5.4field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

26 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 48 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Tasneem KaleemDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic Florida, Jacksonville, USA.
Timothy D MalouffDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic Florida, Jacksonville, USA.
William C StrossDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic Florida, Jacksonville, USA.
Mark R WaddleDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic Florida, Jacksonville, USA.
Daniel H MillerDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Gamma West Cancer Services, Idaho Falls, USA.
Audrey L SeymourDepartment of Public Affairs, Mayo Clinic Florida, Jacksonville, USA.
Nicholas G ZaorskyDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Penn State University, Hershey, USA.
Robert C MillerDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of Maryland, Baltimore, USA.
Daniel M TrifilettiDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic Florida, Jacksonville, USA.
Laura VallowDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic Florida, Jacksonville, USA.
Mayo Clinic in Florida · USJacksonville College · USUniversity of Maryland, Baltimore · USCancer Services · USPenn State Milton S. Hershey Medical Center · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction There is widespread public interest when celebrities are diagnosed with cancer. We sought to assess how this interest impacts awareness of prevalent cancers. Methods We reviewed common cancer-related search terms using Google Trends (Google LLC, Mountain View, CA) between the years 2004 and 2017 and retrospectively correlated these findings with media or celebrity-related events. The Google Trends application was used to obtain the "search volume index" (SVI), defined as the number of searches for a specific term standardized to the total number of searches over that time period. Data were presented in a graphical format. Isolated peaks of greater than 25% from the baseline SVI were identified. Using the date of the peaks, a further search was performed to determine if any event in the media triggered the peak. Results "Lung Cancer," "Pancreas Cancer," "Endometrial Cancer," "Cervical Cancer," "Brain Cancer," and "Glioblastoma" each had the highest peak correspond with a celebrity-related event covered in the media. These search terms displayed several additional isolated peaks, the majority of which could all be correlated with a significant media event (%). The search term "Breast Cancer" consistently had a peaked interest during October (breast cancer awareness month). Breast cancer events relating to public figures had little to no relative impact on search volume during this period. None of the other cancer search terms displayed the same cyclical pattern during their respective awareness months. Colon, rectal, and prostate cancer demonstrated stable search volumes over time, without an isolated peak. Conclusion Internet search activity among English speakers of most general cancer terms exhibit peaks coinciding with events that occur to celebrity figures or advances in medicines that are substantially covered in the media. In all cases but "breast cancer," these events lend to higher search activity as compared to campaigns and awareness months. Our study suggests that media coverage of public figures with cancer may trigger substantial Internet interest in non-breast cancers, more so than traditional efforts to raise awareness.

Indexed as

cancercelebritygooglesearch engine

Identifiers

PMID31608195
PMCPMC6783227
OpenAlexW2897685653

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.