Normalizing Google Scholar data for use in research evaluation.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Mingers J
PROVIDER: S-EPMC5502064 | biostudies-other | 2017
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundEnvironmental exposures are commonly estimated using spatial methods, with most epidemiological studies relying on home addresses. Passively collected smartphone location data, like Google Location History (GLH) data, may present an opportunity to integrate existing long-term time-activity data.ObjectivesWe aimed to evaluate the potential use of GLH data for capturing long-term retrospective time-activity data for environmental health research.MethodsWe included 378 individuals who participated in previous Global Positioning System (GPS) studies within the Washington State Twin Registry. GLH data consists of location information that has been routinely collected since 2010 when location sharing was enabled within android operating systems or Google apps. We created instructions for participants to download their GLH data and provide it through secure data transfer. We summarized the GLH data provided, compared it to available GPS data, and conducted an exposure assessment for nitrogen dioxide (NO2) air pollution.ResultsOf 378 individuals contacted, we received GLH data from 61 individuals (16.1%) and 53 (14.0%) indicated interest but did not have historical GLH data available. The provided GLH data spanned 2010-2021 and included 34 million locations, capturing 66,677 participant days. The median number of days with GLH data per participant was 752, capturing 442 unique locations. When we compared GLH data to 2-wk GPS data (∼1.8 million points), 95% of GPS time-activity points were within 100m of GLH locations. We observed important differences between NO2 exposures assigned at home locations compared with GLH locations, highlighting the importance of GLH data to environmental exposure assessment.DiscussionWe believe collecting GLH data is a feasible and cost-effective method for capturing retrospective time-activity patterns for large populations that presents new opportunities for environmental epidemiology. Cohort studies should consider adding GLH data collection to capture historical time-activity patterns of participants, employing a "bring-your-own-location-data" citizen science approach. Privacy remains a concern that needs to be carefully managed when using GLH data. https://doi.org/10.1289/EHP10829.
| S-EPMC9648904 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundGoogle Trends is a novel, freely accessible tool that allows users to interact with Internet search data, which may provide deep insights into population behavior and health-related phenomena. However, there is limited knowledge about its potential uses and limitations. We therefore systematically reviewed health care literature using Google Trends to classify articles by topic and study aim; evaluate the methodology and validation of the tool; and address limitations for its use in research.Methods and findingsPRISMA guidelines were followed. Two independent reviewers systematically identified studies utilizing Google Trends for health care research from MEDLINE and PubMed. Seventy studies met our inclusion criteria. Google Trends publications increased seven-fold from 2009 to 2013. Studies were classified into four topic domains: infectious disease (27% of articles), mental health and substance use (24%), other non-communicable diseases (16%), and general population behavior (33%). By use, 27% of articles utilized Google Trends for casual inference, 39% for description, and 34% for surveillance. Among surveillance studies, 92% were validated against a reference standard data source, and 80% of studies using correlation had a correlation statistic ≥0.70. Overall, 67% of articles provided a rationale for their search input. However, only 7% of articles were reproducible based on complete documentation of search strategy. We present a checklist to facilitate appropriate methodological documentation for future studies. A limitation of the study is the challenge of classifying heterogeneous studies utilizing a novel data source.ConclusionGoogle Trends is being used to study health phenomena in a variety of topic domains in myriad ways. However, poor documentation of methods precludes the reproducibility of the findings. Such documentation would enable other researchers to determine the consistency of results provided by Google Trends for a well-specified query over time. Furthermore, greater transparency can improve its reliability as a research tool.
| S-EPMC4215636 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceResearchers often analyze cancer registry data to assess for differences in survival among cancer treatments. However, the retrospective, nonrandomized design of these analyses raises questions about study validity.ObjectiveTo examine the extent to which comparative effectiveness analyses using observational cancer registry data produce results concordant with those of randomized clinical trials.Design, setting, and participantsIn this comparative effectiveness study, a total of 141 randomized clinical trials referenced in the National Comprehensive Cancer Network Clinical Practice Guidelines for 8 common solid tumor types were identified. Data on participants within the National Cancer Database (NCDB) diagnosed between 2004 and 2014, matching the eligibility criteria of the randomized clinical trial, were obtained. The present study was conducted from August 1, 2017, to September 10, 2019. The trials included 85 118 patients, and the corresponding NCDB analyses included 1 344 536 patients. Three Cox proportional hazards regression models were used to determine hazard ratios (HRs) for overall survival, including univariable, multivariable, and propensity score-adjusted models. Multivariable and propensity score analyses controlled for potential confounders, including demographic, comorbidity, clinical, treatment, and tumor-related variables.Main outcomes and measuresThe main outcome was concordance between the results of randomized clinical trials and observational cancer registry data. Hazard ratios with an NCDB analysis were considered concordant if the NDCB HR fell within the 95% CI of the randomized clinical trial HR. An NCDB analysis was considered concordant if both the NCDB and clinical trial P values for survival were nonsignificant (P ≥ .05) or if they were both significant (P < .05) with survival favoring the same treatment arm in the NCDB and in the randomized clinical trial.ResultsAnalyses using the NCDB-produced HRs for survival were concordant with those of 141 randomized clinical trials in 79 univariable analyses (56%), 98 multivariable analyses (70%), and 90 propensity score models (64%). The NCDB analyses produced P values concordant with randomized clinical trials in 58 univariable analyses (41%), 65 multivariable analyses (46%), and 63 propensity score models (45%). No clinical trial characteristics were associated with concordance between NCDB analyses and randomized clinical trials, including disease site, type of clinical intervention, or severity of cancer.Conclusions and relevanceThe findings of this study suggest that comparative effectiveness research using cancer registry data often produces survival outcomes discordant with those of randomized clinical trial data. These findings may help provide context for clinicians and policy makers interpreting observational comparative effectiveness research in oncology.
| S-EPMC9009816 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Individuals are increasingly turning to search engines like Google to obtain health information and access resources. Analysis of Google search queries offers a novel approach, which is part of the methodological toolkit for infodemiology or infoveillance researchers, to understanding population health concerns and needs in real time or near-real time. While searches predominantly have been examined with the Google Trends website tool, newer application programming interfaces (APIs) are now available to academics to draw a richer landscape of searches. These APIs allow users to write code in languages like Python to retrieve sample data directly from Google servers. OBJECTIVE:The purpose of this paper is to describe a novel protocol to determine the top queries, volume of queries, and the top sites reached by a population searching on the web for a specific health term. The protocol retrieves Google search data obtained from three Google APIs: Google Trends, Google Health Trends (also referred to as Flu Trends), and Google Custom Search. METHODS:Our protocol consisted of four steps: (1) developing a master list of top search queries for an initial search term using Google Trends, (2) gathering information on relative search volume using Google Health Trends, (3) determining the most popular sites using Google Custom Search, and (4) calculating estimated total search volume. We tested the protocol following key procedures at each step and verified its usefulness by examining search traffic on birth control in 2017 in the United States. Two separate programmers working independently achieved similar results with insignificant variation due to sample variability. RESULTS:We successfully tested the methodology on the initial search term birth control. We identified top search queries for birth control, of which birth control pill was the most popular and obtained the relative and estimated total search volume for the top queries: relative search volume was 0.54 for the pill, corresponding to an estimated 9.3-10.7 million searches. We used the estimates of the proportion of search activity for the top queries to arrive at a generated list of the most popular websites: for the pill, the Planned Parenthood website was the top site. CONCLUSIONS:The proposed methodological framework demonstrates how to retrieve Google query data from multiple Google APIs and provides thorough documentation required to systematically identify search queries and websites, as well as estimate relative and total search volume of queries in real time or near-real time in specific locations and time periods. Although the protocol needs further testing, it allows researchers to replicate the steps and shows promise in advancing our understanding of population-level health concerns. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID):RR1-10.2196/16543.
| S-EPMC7381000 | biostudies-literature
Project description:This study utilise the examination of normal gastro-intestinal tissues to determine a tissue specific signal for use in deriving the intestinal signature of intestinal metaplasias of the oesophagus. Normal oesophageal, colonic and duodenal tissue biopsies were taken after informed consent and RNA was extracted following histological examination of adjacent tissues for normal aperaing mucosa. Three of each tissue type
2013-07-07 | E-GEOD-40220 | biostudies-arrayexpress
Project description:This study utilise the examination of normal gastro-intestinal tissues to determine a tissue specific signal for use in deriving the intestinal signature of intestinal metaplasias of the oesophagus. Normal oesophageal, colonic and duodenal tissue biopsies were taken after informed consent and RNA was extracted following histological examination of adjacent tissues for normal aperaing mucosa.
2013-07-07 | GSE40220 | GEO
Project description:BackgroundNational classifications and terminologies already routinely used for documentation within patient care settings enable the unambiguous representation of clinical information. However, the diversity of different vocabularies across health care institutions and countries is a barrier to achieving semantic interoperability and exchanging data across sites. The Observational Medical Outcomes Partnership (OMOP) Common Data Model (CDM) enables the standardization of structure and medical terminology. It allows the mapping of national vocabularies into so-called standard concepts, representing normative expressions for international analyses and research. Within our project "Hybrid Quality Indicators Using Machine Learning Methods" (Hybrid-QI), we aim to harmonize source codes used in German claims data vocabularies that are currently unavailable in the OMOP CDM.ObjectiveThis study aims to increase the coverage of German vocabularies in the OMOP CDM. We aim to completely transform the source codes used in German claims data into the OMOP CDM without data loss and make German claims data usable for OMOP CDM-based research.MethodsTo prepare the missing German vocabularies for the OMOP CDM, we defined a vocabulary preparation approach consisting of the identification of all codes of the corresponding vocabularies, their assembly into machine-readable tables, and the translation of German designations into English. Furthermore, we used 2 proposed approaches for OMOP-compliant vocabulary preparation: the mapping to standard concepts using the Observational Health Data Sciences and Informatics (OHDSI) tool Usagi and the preparation of new 2-billion concepts (ie, concept_id >2 billion). Finally, we evaluated the prepared vocabularies regarding completeness and correctness using synthetic German claims data and calculated the coverage of German claims data vocabularies in the OMOP CDM.ResultsOur vocabulary preparation approach was able to map 3 missing German vocabularies to standard concepts and prepare 8 vocabularies as new 2-billion concepts. The completeness evaluation showed that the prepared vocabularies cover 44.3% (3288/7417) of the source codes contained in German claims data. The correctness evaluation revealed that the specified validity periods in the OMOP CDM are compliant for the majority (705,531/706,032, 99.9%) of source codes and associated dates in German claims data. The calculation of the vocabulary coverage showed a noticeable decrease of missing vocabularies from 55% (11/20) to 10% (2/20) due to our preparation approach.ConclusionsBy preparing 10 vocabularies, we showed that our approach is applicable to any type of vocabulary used in a source data set. The prepared vocabularies are currently limited to German vocabularies, which can only be used in national OMOP CDM research projects, because the mapping of new 2-billion concepts to standard concepts is missing. To participate in international OHDSI network studies with German claims data, future work is required to map the prepared 2-billion concepts to standard concepts.
| S-EPMC10653283 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has highlighted once more the great need for comprehensive access to, and uncomplicated use of, pre-existing patient data for medical research. Enabling secondary research-use of patient-data is a prerequisite for the efficient and sustainable promotion of translation and personalisation in medicine, and for the advancement of public-health. However, balancing the legitimate interests of scientists in broad and unrestricted data-access and the demand for individual autonomy, privacy and social justice is a great challenge for patient-based medical research.MethodsWe therefore conducted two questionnaire-based surveys among North-German outpatients (n = 650) to determine their attitude towards data-donation for medical research, implemented as an opt-out-process.ResultsWe observed a high level of acceptance (75.0%), the most powerful predictor of a positive attitude towards data-donation was the conviction that every citizen has a duty to contribute to the improvement of medical research (> 80% of participants approving data-donation). Interestingly, patients distinguished sharply between research inside and outside the EU, despite a general awareness that universities and public research institutions cooperate with commercial companies, willingness to allow use of donated data by the latter was very low (7.1% to 29.1%, depending upon location of company). The most popular measures among interviewees to counteract reservations against commercial data-use were regulation by law (61.4%), stipulating in the process that data are not sold or resold (84.6%). A majority requested control of both the use (46.8%) and the protection (41.5%) of the data by independent bodies.ConclusionsIn conclusion, data-donation for medical research, implemented as a combination of legal entitlement and easy-to-exercise-right to opt-out, was found to be widely supported by German patients and therefore warrants further consideration for a transposition into national law.
| S-EPMC8672332 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Online activity-based data can be used to aid infectious disease forecasting. Our aim was to exploit the converging nature of the tuberculosis (TB) and diabetes epidemics to forecast TB case numbers. Thus, we extended TB prediction models based on traditional data with diabetes-related Google searches. We obtained data on the weekly case numbers of TB in Germany from June 8th, 2014, to May 5th, 2019. Internet search data were obtained from a Google Trends (GTD) search for 'diabetes' to the corresponding interval. A seasonal autoregressive moving average (SARIMA) model (0,1,1) (1,0,0) [52] was selected to describe the weekly TB case numbers with and without GTD as an external regressor. We cross-validated the SARIMA models to obtain the root mean squared errors (RMSE). We repeated this procedure with autoregressive feed-forward neural network (NNAR) models using 5-fold cross-validation. To simulate a data-poor surveillance setting, we also tested traditional and GTD-extended models against a hold-out dataset using a decreased 52-week-long period with missing values for training. Cross-validation resulted in an RMSE of 20.83 for the traditional model and 18.56 for the GTD-extended model. Cross-validation of the NNAR models showed a mean RMSE of 19.49 for the traditional model and 18.99 for the GTD-extended model. When we tested the models trained on a decreased dataset with missing values, the GTD-extended models achieved significantly better prediction than the traditional models (p < 0.001). The GTD-extended models outperformed the traditional models in all assessed model evaluation parameters. Using online activity-based data regarding diabetes can improve TB forecasting, but further validation is warranted.
| S-EPMC7480530 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Google Scholar (GS) is a free tool that may be used by researchers to analyze citations; find appropriate literature; or evaluate the quality of an author or a contender for tenure, promotion, a faculty position, funding, or research grants. GS has become a major bibliographic and citation database. For assessing the literature, databases, such as PubMed, PsycINFO, Scopus, and Web of Science, can be used in place of GS because they are more reliable. The aim of this study was to examine the accuracy of citation data collected from GS and provide a comprehensive description of the errors and miscounts identified. For this purpose, 281 documents that cited 2 specific works were retrieved via Publish or Perish software (PoP) and were examined. This work studied the false-positive issue inherent in the analysis of neuroimaging data. The results revealed an unprecedented error rate, with 279 of 281 (99.3%) examined references containing at least one error. Nonacademic documents tended to contain more errors than academic publications (U=5117.0; P<.001). This viewpoint article, based on a case study examining GS data accuracy, shows that GS data not only fail to be accurate but also potentially expose researchers, who would use these data without verification, to substantial biases in their analyses and results. Further work must be conducted to assess the consequences of using GS data extracted by PoP.
| S-EPMC9187964 | biostudies-literature