Google Search Queries About Neurosurgical Topics: Are They a Suitable Guide for Neurosurgeons?

OBJECTIVE Google is the most popular search engine, with about 100 billion searches per month. Google Trends is an integrated tool that allows users to obtain Google's search popularity statistics from the last decade. Our aim was to evaluate whether Google Trends is a useful tool to assess the public's interest in specific neurosurgical topics. METHODS We evaluated Google Trends statistics for the neurosurgical search topic areas "hydrocephalus," "spinal stenosis," "concussion," "vestibular schwannoma," and "cerebral arteriovenous malformation." We compared these with bibliometric data from PubMed and epidemiologic data from the German Federal Monitoring Agency. In addition, we assessed Google users' search behavior for the search terms "glioblastoma" and "meningioma." RESULTS Over the last 10 years, there has been an increasing interest in the topic "concussion" from Internet users in general and scientists. "Spinal stenosis," "concussion," and "vestibular schwannoma" are topics that are of special interest in high-income countries (eg, Germany), whereas "hydrocephalus" is a popular topic in low- and middle-income countries. The Google-defined top searches within these topic areas revealed more detail about people's interests (eg, "normal pressure hydrocephalus" or "football concussion" ranked among the most popular search queries within the corresponding topics). There was a similar volume of queries for "glioblastoma" and "meningioma." CONCLUSIONS Google Trends is a useful source to elicit information about general trends in peoples' health interests and the role of different diseases across the world. The Internet presence of neurosurgical units and surgeons can be guided by online users' interests to achieve high-quality, professional-endorsed patient education.

[1]  A. Sharan,et al.  Variability of patient spine education by Internet search engine , 2014, Clinical Neurology and Neurosurgery.

[2]  T. Madden,et al.  Accuracy of information about the intrauterine device on the Internet. , 2016, American journal of obstetrics and gynecology.

[3]  Michael J Kerin,et al.  The effect of breast cancer awareness month on internet search activity - a comparison with awareness campaigns for lung and prostate cancer , 2011, BMC Cancer.

[4]  D. Lazer,et al.  The Parable of Google Flu: Traps in Big Data Analysis , 2014, Science.

[5]  A. Karlsson,et al.  Content and Quality of Information Websites About Congenital Heart Defects Following a Prenatal Diagnosis , 2015, Interactive journal of medical research.

[6]  Mark Mosley,et al.  Evaluating the quality of online information about concussions , 2014, JAAPA : official journal of the American Academy of Physician Assistants.

[7]  Camille Pelat,et al.  A Method to Assess Seasonality of Urinary Tract Infections Based on Medication Sales and Google Trends , 2013, PloS one.

[8]  Samuel A. Taylor,et al.  Online resources for shoulder instability: what are patients reading? , 2014, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[9]  S. Ohaegbulam The epidemiology of brain arteriovenous malformations. , 2001, Neurosurgery.

[10]  Josip Car,et al.  Interventions for enhancing consumers' online health literacy. , 2011, The Cochrane database of systematic reviews.

[11]  Jeremy Ginsberg,et al.  Detecting influenza epidemics using search engine query data , 2009, Nature.

[12]  Cécile Viboud,et al.  Reassessing Google Flu Trends Data for Detection of Seasonal and Pandemic Influenza: A Comparative Epidemiological Study at Three Geographic Scales , 2013, PLoS Comput. Biol..

[13]  V. Miele,et al.  Chronic Traumatic Encephalopathy in Contact Sports: A Systematic Review of All Reported Pathological Cases , 2015, PloS one.

[14]  A. Brodbelt,et al.  Glioblastoma in England: 2007-2011. , 2015, European journal of cancer.

[15]  Joshua T. Anderson,et al.  Can Internet Information on Vertebroplasty be a Reliable Means of Patient Self-education? , 2014, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[16]  P. Yi,et al.  Evaluating online information regarding the direct anterior approach for total hip arthroplasty. , 2015, The Journal of arthroplasty.

[17]  A. Mitchell-Innes,et al.  Quality of information available via the internet for patients with head and neck cancer: are we improving? , 2015, European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology.

[18]  W. Chou,et al.  Health-related Internet use among cancer survivors: data from the Health Information National Trends Survey, 2003–2008 , 2011, Journal of cancer survivorship : research and practice.

[19]  W. Chou,et al.  Is Online Health Activity Alive and Well or Flatlining? Findings From 10 Years of the Health Information National Trends Survey , 2015, Journal of health communication.

[20]  Kenneth Lee,et al.  Consumer Use of “Dr Google”: A Survey on Health Information-Seeking Behaviors and Navigational Needs , 2015, Journal of medical Internet research.

[21]  Daipayan Guha,et al.  The Current Use of Social Media in Neurosurgery. , 2016, World neurosurgery.

[22]  I. Baldi,et al.  Epidemiology of meningiomas. , 2014, Neuro-Chirurgie.

[23]  C. O'rourke,et al.  Detecting internet search activity for mouth cancer in Ireland. , 2016, The British journal of oral & maxillofacial surgery.

[24]  G. Ozakinci,et al.  The Quality and Readability of Online Consumer Information About Gynecologic Cancer , 2014, International Journal of Gynecologic Cancer.