ArticleCardiology research2020
Assessment of the Effect of the Go Red for Women Campaign on Search Engine Queries for Cardiovascular Disease in Women.
Article in Cardiology research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Maternal cardiovascular research and education should be prioritized in the United States.American journal of physiology. Heart and circulatory physiology · 2025Article
- Heart month: Redesigning the message.American journal of preventive cardiology · 2024Article
- Social Media and Cardiovascular Health: Implications for Women.Current atherosclerosis reports · 2022Review
- Article
- Review
- Sex Differences in Acute Coronary Syndromes: A Global Perspective.Journal of cardiovascular development and disease · 2022Review
- Big Data in Cardiology: State-of-Art and Future Prospects.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2022Review
- Relationship between internet research data of oral neoplasms and public health programs in the European Union.BMC oral health · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe Go Red for Women (GoRedW) campaign aims to increase awareness of cardiovascular disease (CVD) and stroke in women. However, assessing the effects of social campaigns on information-seeking behaviors may be challenging. The purpose of this study was to ascertain the effect of GoRedW using a large sample of unbiased real-world data from Google Trends (GTr) and evaluate the temporal correlation of online search queries for CVD and stroke in women with GoRedW.
methodsWe conducted a retrospective study using GTr, a public tool from the Google search engine to obtain relative search volumes (RSVs) related to CVD and stroke in women in the period January 2004 to April 2019 in the USA. In addition, trends of GoRedW were compared with those of the well-established Breast Cancer Awareness Month (BCAM) campaign.
resultsRSVs increased for queries of GoRedW and all searched terms for CVD but not for stroke in women during February compared to other months of the year without active campaign. The strong pattern with peaks of temporal increase was consistent over the 15-year study period. RSV of "Go Red for Women" in February increased on average 494% (range: 211% to 789%). The highest temporal increase on search queries for CVD was for the term "heart disease (in) women" with an average of 114% (24% to 182%). We found a positive correlation between RSVs of GoRedW and the term "heart disease (in) women" (r = 0.54, P < 0.001). RSVs for "Breast Cancer Awareness Month" had a higher increase during the active campaign month compared to GoRedW and showed a stronger positive correlation (r = 0.78, P < 0.001).
conclusionsSearch engines are a valuable resource to provide insights on information demand and to assess the effectiveness of social campaigns and interventions. Our study showed an increase in the RSVs for queries of GoRedW and all CVD terms which correlated with the active campaign months over a 15-year period.
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.