ArticleFrontiers in research metrics and analytics2022
Modeling COVID-19 incidence with Google Trends.
Article in Frontiers in research metrics and analytics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- Pandemic-Associated Shifts and Spatial Inequality in Public Attention to Pulmonary Function Testing in China: A 14-Year Baidu Index Study.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- A COVID-19 prediction Model based on symptomatology google trends and its optimization.BMC infectious diseases · 2026Article
- Public Search Behavior and Tuberculosis Cases in Indonesia 2019-2023: An Infodemiology Study Using Google Trends .F1000Research · 2026Article
- On the importance of communication, advocacy, and information accuracy in destigmatizing mpox disease.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- 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
- Investigating Google Trends to forecast acute febrile illness outbreaks in North India reported through the Integrated Disease Surveillance Program.BMC infectious diseases · 2025Article
- Impact of Demographic and Clinical Subgroups in Google Trends Data: Infodemiology Case Study on Asthma Hospitalizations.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- Public interest in online searching of asthma information: insights from a Google trends analysis.BMC pulmonary medicine · 2025Article
- Article
- Interest in mammography across European countries: a retrospective "Google Trends" comparative study.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2023Article
- Forecasting daily COVID-19 cases with gradient boosted regression trees and other methods: evidence from U.S. cities.Frontiers in public health · 2023Article
- Construction and validation of a COVID-19 pandemic trend forecast model based on Google Trends data for smell and taste loss.Frontiers in public health · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Infodemiologic methods could be used to enhance modeling infectious diseases. It is of interest to verify the utility of these methods using a Nigerian case study. We used Google Trends data to track COVID-19 incidences and assessed whether they could complement traditional data based solely on reported case numbers. Data on the Nigerian weekly COVID-19 cases spanning through March 1, 2020, to May 31, 2021, were matched with internet search data from Google Trends. The reported weekly incidence numbers and the GT data were split into training and testing sets. ARIMA models were fitted to describe reported weekly COVID cases using the training set. Several COVID-related search terms were theoretically and empirically assessed for initial screening. The utilized Google Trends (GT) variable was added to the ARIMA model as a regressor. Model forecasts, both with and without GTD, were compared with weekly cases in the test set over 13 weeks. Forecast accuracies were compared visually and using RMSE (root mean square error) and MAE (mean average error). Statistical significance of the difference in predictions was determined with the two-sided Diebold-Mariano test. Preliminary results of contemporaneous correlations between COVID-related search terms and weekly COVID cases reveal "loss of smell," "loss of taste," "fever" (in order of magnitude) as significantly associated with the official cases. Predictions of the ARIMA model using solely reported case numbers resulted in an RMSE (root mean squared error) of 411.4 and mean absolute error (MAE) of 354.9. The GT expanded model achieved better forecasting accuracy (RMSE: 388.7 and MAE = 340.1). Corrected Akaike Information Criteria also favored the GT expanded model (869.4 vs. 872.2). The difference in predictive performances was significant when using a two-sided Diebold-Mariano test (DM = 6.75,
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.