ArticlePloS one2023
Correlating global trends in COVID-19 cases with online symptom checker self-assessments.
Article in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Social Media-Based Cancer Education: Bibliometric and Thematic Analysis.JMIR cancer · 2025Article
- An analysis of virtual triage utilization by pregnant women prior to and during the COVID-19 pandemic.Frontiers in global women's health · 2024Article
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 at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundOnline symptom checkers are digital health solutions that provide a differential diagnosis based on a user's symptoms. During the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, symptom checkers have become increasingly important due to physical distance constraints and reduced access to in-person medical consultations. Furthermore, various symptom checkers specialised in the assessment of COVID-19 infection have been produced.
objectivesAssess the correlation between COVID-19 risk assessments from an online symptom checker and current trends in COVID-19 infections. Analyse whether those correlations are reflective of various country-wise quality of life measures. Lastly, determine whether the trends found in symptom checker assessments predict or lag relative to those of the COVID-19 infections. MATERIALS AND
methodsIn this study, we compile the outcomes of COVID-19 risk assessments provided by the symptom checker Symptoma (www.symptoma.com) in 18 countries with suitably large user bases. We analyse this dataset's spatial and temporal features compared to the number of newly confirmed COVID-19 cases published by the respective countries.
resultsWe find an average correlation of 0.342 between the number of Symptoma users assessed to have a high risk of a COVID-19 infection and the official COVID-19 infection numbers. Further, we show a significant relationship between that correlation and the self-reported health of a country. Lastly, we find that the symptom checker is, on average, ahead (median +3 days) of the official infection numbers for most countries.
conclusionWe show that online symptom checkers can capture the national-level trends in coronavirus infections. As such, they provide a valuable and unique information source in policymaking against pandemics, unrestricted by conventional resources.
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.