Google Trends Now Predicting Virus Outbreaks

Google Trends Now Predicting Virus Outbreaks plus.google.com This study, published in the National Academy of Sciences, suggests that the chickenpox virus isn’t spread how we initially thought, and might be much more of a problem than it was in the past. But to look a little bit further into this data, researchers used a very unlikely source: Google Trends. Researchers used Google Trends previously to look at past influenza rates as well as to estimate future influenza rates. Knowing this, researchers assumed they’d be able to use the same system to track chickenpox rates. So, they decided to run a study to determine whether or not the chickenpox, like many other viruses such as the common cold and the flu, is a seasonal disease. So, researchers looked at the Google search data over a period of 11 years and spanning 36 countries. The data was then validated by published clinical cases. So what were the results? The findings showed that the virus peaked in the spring on a global scale. However, the study also showed that the countries that regularly use vaccines had a much weaker peak in the spring. On top of this, the study’s results were fairly limited because the countries that were studied were fully developed. This means that the countries studied had internet access, high levels of education and literacy all necessary to search for the information necessary to the study online. According to Dr. William Schaffner, an infectious disease expert at Vanderbilt University Medical Center, “Data can instruct a ministry of health, where they don’t have any idea about chickenpox [rates].” Schaffner was not involved in the study, but claimed that the findings would be useful to countries where a vaccine for said virus would not be common and the rate of the virus wouldn’t be tracked. He also noted the extent of difference in chickenpox searches among the countries studied in the research. According to him, “In countries where we immunize routinely, the seasonality is much more muted and the inquiries themselves aren’t about disease and symptoms and treatment [but] about vaccines.” This is probably because news of the infection is spread through word of mouth, so the searches on Google were most likely due to fear or concern from a parent that their child was infected. Kevin Bakker, the lead author of the study, was the mind behind the use of Google data for the study. He claimed he wanted to use this data after noticing a correlation between Google searches and seasonal peaks in infectious diseases. According to Bakker: “I think digital epidemiology, which is using Google trends or Twitter trends … is a complement to clinical data … You take your child to the doctor and the doctor sends the case report to state health officials and the CDC compiles it all. If I go to Google Trends, you can see the top trends in data anywhere in the world.” Bakker is currently a graduate student in Ecology and Evolutionary Biology at the University of Michigan. Through this use of Google Trends, Bakker has bypassed the tediousness of finding traditional, reported clinical data and has instead formed a much quicker way to a conclusion (which will, of course, have to be backed by the reported data down the road). But just for the sake of saving time, this new method appears to be ingenious. Because it takes so long for data to finally reach the CDC, it’s important for researchers to have access to the data beforehand, even if it is secondhand data found on search engines. Bakker stressed the importance of supplementing clinical data with the Google data, as one will help achieve faster findings while the other will prove invariably that these findings are in fact correct. Dr. Amy Edwards is a pediatric infectious disease specialist at the University Hospitals Rainbow Babies Children’s Hospital. She does believe that more evidence is needed to back up the Google data (suggesting there’s still going to be a tedious fact-checking period), but she also believes that Google data is going to be largely beneficial in future research regarding outbreaks of certain diseases. According to Edwards, “It has the potential to be extremely interesting particularly in unreported and under-reported diseases.” She also suggests that such information can help medical personnel preemptively screen for viruses as well as to plan better in terms of preventative care. While it sounds ridiculous that Google Trends is actually helping in medical research, the search engine may have just saved researchers eons of time they otherwise wouldn’t have had. And as for the general public, we’re probably going to benefit the most. So technology isn’t all bad, huh?