Conor Senecal1, R Jay Widmer1, Lilach O Lerman2, Amir Lerman1. 1. Department of Cardiovascular Diseases, Mayo Clinic and College of Medicine, Rochester, Minnesota. 2. Division of Nephrology and Hypertension, Department of Internal Medicine, Mayo Clinic and College of Medicine, Rochester, Minnesota.
Abstract
Importance: Online search for symptoms is common and may be useful in early identification of patients experiencing coronary heart disease (CHD) and in epidemiologically studying the disease. Objective: To investigate the correlation of online symptom search for chest pain with disease prevalence of CHD. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective study used Google Trends, a publicly available tool that provides relative search frequency for queried terms, to find searches for chest pain from January 2010 to June 2017 in the United States, the United Kingdom, and Australia. For the United States, results were obtained by state. These data were compared with publicly available prevalence data from the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention of CHD hospitalizations by state for the same period. The same terms were used to evaluate seasonal and diurnal variation. Data were analyzed from July 2017 to October 2017. Main Outcomes and Measures: Correlation of search engine query for chest pain symptoms with temporal and geographic epidemiology. Results: State-by-state comparisons with reported CHD hospitalization were correlated (R = 0.81; P < .001). Significant monthly variation was appreciated in all countries studied, with the United States, United Kingdom, and Australia showing an 11% to 39% increase in search frequency in winter months compared with summer months. Diurnal variation showed a morning peak for search between local time 6 am and 8 am, with a greater than 100% increase seen in peak searching hours, which was consistent among the 3 countries studied. Conclusions and Relevance: Relative search frequency closely correlated with CHD epidemiology. This may have important implications for search engines as a resource for patients and a potential early-detection mechanism for physicians moving forward.
Importance: Online search for symptoms is common and may be useful in early identification of patients experiencing coronary heart disease (CHD) and in epidemiologically studying the disease. Objective: To investigate the correlation of online symptom search for chest pain with disease prevalence of CHD. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective study used Google Trends, a publicly available tool that provides relative search frequency for queried terms, to find searches for chest pain from January 2010 to June 2017 in the United States, the United Kingdom, and Australia. For the United States, results were obtained by state. These data were compared with publicly available prevalence data from the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention of CHD hospitalizations by state for the same period. The same terms were used to evaluate seasonal and diurnal variation. Data were analyzed from July 2017 to October 2017. Main Outcomes and Measures: Correlation of search engine query for chest pain symptoms with temporal and geographic epidemiology. Results: State-by-state comparisons with reported CHD hospitalization were correlated (R = 0.81; P < .001). Significant monthly variation was appreciated in all countries studied, with the United States, United Kingdom, and Australia showing an 11% to 39% increase in search frequency in winter months compared with summer months. Diurnal variation showed a morning peak for search between local time 6 am and 8 am, with a greater than 100% increase seen in peak searching hours, which was consistent among the 3 countries studied. Conclusions and Relevance: Relative search frequency closely correlated with CHD epidemiology. This may have important implications for search engines as a resource for patients and a potential early-detection mechanism for physicians moving forward.
Authors: J E Muller; P H Stone; Z G Turi; J D Rutherford; C A Czeisler; C Parker; W K Poole; E Passamani; R Roberts; T Robertson Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 1985-11-21 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Jeremy Ginsberg; Matthew H Mohebbi; Rajan S Patel; Lynnette Brammer; Mark S Smolinski; Larry Brilliant Journal: Nature Date: 2009-02-19 Impact factor: 49.962
Authors: Edward P Havranek; Mahasin S Mujahid; Donald A Barr; Irene V Blair; Meryl S Cohen; Salvador Cruz-Flores; George Davey-Smith; Cheryl R Dennison-Himmelfarb; Michael S Lauer; Debra W Lockwood; Milagros Rosal; Clyde W Yancy Journal: Circulation Date: 2015-08-03 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Sudhakar V Nuti; Brian Wayda; Isuru Ranasinghe; Sisi Wang; Rachel P Dreyer; Serene I Chen; Karthik Murugiah Journal: PLoS One Date: 2014-10-22 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Michael S Deiner; Gurbani Kaur; Stephen D McLeod; Julie M Schallhorn; James Chodosh; Daniel H Hwang; Thomas M Lietman; Travis C Porco Journal: J Med Internet Res Date: 2022-07-05 Impact factor: 7.076
Authors: Muhammad Syamsuddin; Muhammad Fakhruddin; Jane Theresa Marlen Sahetapy-Engel; Edy Soewono Journal: J Med Internet Res Date: 2020-07-24 Impact factor: 5.428
Authors: Benjamin A Y Cher; Eric A Wilson; Carl G Engelke; Anjan K Saha; Alexa M Pinsky; Ryan F Townshend; Ann V Wolski; Michael Broderick; Allison M Milen; Audrey Lau; Amrit Singh; Sandro K Cinti Journal: J Med Internet Res Date: 2021-11-01 Impact factor: 5.428
Authors: Belén Mora Garijo; Jonathan E Katz; Aubrey Greer; Mia Gonzalgo; Alejandro García López; Leslie Deane; Ranjith Ramasamy Journal: Int J Impot Res Date: 2021-02-11 Impact factor: 2.408