Google arama hacmi verileri ile Türkiye’de hastalık farkındalık günlerinin etkinliğinin değerlendirilmesi

Yıl 2020, Cilt: 13 Sayı: 2, 177 - 188, 26.08.2020

Gamze Bayın Donar

https://doi.org/10.26559/mersinsbd.691939

Cited By: 2

Öz

Amaç: Bu çalışma kapsamında, Türkiye’de toplumun belirli hastalık ve sağlıkla ilgili farkındalık tarihlerinde, o hastalıklarla ilgili olarak internetten bilgi arama davranışlarında farklılık olup olmadığını tespit etmek amaçlanmıştır. Yöntem: Dünya Sağlık Örgütü (DSÖ) ve Birleşmiş Milletler (BM) gibi uluslararası kuruluşlar tarafından desteklenen uluslararası farkındalık günlerine/aylarına sahip 20 farklı hastalık seçilmiş ve bu hastalıklara ilişkin Google tarafından geliştirilen Google Trends verileri ile 2008 ve 2018 yılları arasındaki Türkiye’nin çevrimiçi arama hacmi verileri kullanılarak retrospektif bir araştırma gerçekleştirilmiştir. Bulgular: Çevrimiçi arama hacimlerinin yıllara göre değişimlerine bakıldığında, “otizm” kelimesinin son 10 yılda %372 artış ile en yüksek artış hızına sahip olan hastalık kavramı olduğu saptanmıştır. Araştırma kapsamında seçilen sağlık ve hastalık ile ilgili kavramların Google arama hacimlerinin aylara göre fark analizi sonuçları değerlendirildiğinde, 20 kavramdan dokuzunda istatistiksel olarak anlamlı fark olduğu sonucuna ulaşılmıştır. AIDS, kanser, otizm, diyabet, meme kanseri, down sendromu, obezite, akciğer kanseri ve KOAH; araştırma kapsamında anlamlı bulunan kavramlardır. Bu hastalıkların Google arama hacimleri farkındalık günlerinin olduğu aylarda diğer aylara göre artış göstermiştir. Sonuç: Bu bulgular, farkındalık etkinliklerinin çevrimiçi arama sonuçlarını ve dolayısıyla da halkın farkındalığını etkileyebileceğini göstermiştir. Dolayısıyla hastalık veya sağlık farkındalık etkinliklerinin artırılarak halkın bilinçlendirilmesi ve dolayısıyla olumlu sağlık davranışlarının artırılması önerilmektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Dijital epidemiyoloji, halk sağlığı, hastalık farkındalığı, çevrimiçi arama hacmi

Evaluation of the effectiveness of disease awareness days in Turkey with Google search volume data

Öz

Aim: In this study, in certain disease and health awareness days, it is aimed to determine whether there is a difference in the society's information seeking behaviors related to those diseases in Turkey. Method: 20 different diseases have been selected with international awareness days / months supported by international organizations such as the World Health Organization (WHO) and the United Nations (UN) and conducted a retrospective study using data from Google Trends online in Turkey between 2008 and 2018 related to the disease developed by Google search volume data. Results: When we look at the changes of online search volumes over the years, it has been determined that the word “autism” is the concept of the disease that has the highest increase rate with 372% increase in the last 10 years. When the difference of Google search volumes of concepts by months is evaluated, it was concluded that 9 out of 20 concepts had a statistically significant difference. AIDS, cancer, autism, diabetes, breast cancer, down syndrome, obesity, lung cancer and COPD; were the concepts that are found meaningful in the research. The Google search volumes of these diseases have increased in the months of awareness days compared to other months. Conclusions: These results showed that awareness activities can affect online search results and thus public awareness. Therefore, it is recommended to raise the awareness of the illness or health awareness and to raise the awareness of the public and thus to increase the positive health behaviors.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Digital epidemiology, public health, disease awareness, online search volume

Kaynakça

• 1. Kalager M, Zelen M, Langmark F, Adami HO. Effect of screening mammography on breast-cancer mortality in Norway. New England Journal of Medicine 2010;363(13):1203-1210.
• 2. Hao Z, Liu M, Ge X. Evaluating the impact of health awareness events on Google search frequency. Preventive medicine reports 2019;15:1-8.
• 3. Neuner-Jehle S, Schmid M, Grüninger U. The “Health Coaching” programme: A new patient-centred and visually supported approach for health behaviour change in primary care. BMC family practice 2013;14(1). doi:10.1186/1471-2296-14-100.
• 4. Wang M, Han X, Fang H, Xu C, Lin X, Xia S, et al. Impact of health education on knowledge and behaviors toward infectious diseases among students in Gansu Province, China. BioMed research international 2018;11:1-12.
• 5. King BR, Howard NJ, Verge CF, Jack MM, Govind N, Jameson K, et al. A diabetes awareness campaign prevents diabetic ketoacidosis in children at their initial presentation with type 1 diabetes. Pediatric diabetes 2012;13(8):647-651.
• 6. Huhman M, Potter LD, Wong FL, Banspach SW, Duke JC, Heitzler CD. Effects of a mass media campaign to increase physical activity among children: Year-1 results of the VERB campaign. Pediatrics 2005;116(2):277-284.
• 7. Shariatpanahi SP, Jafari A, Sadeghipour M, Azadeh-Fard N, Majidzadeh-A K, Farahmand L, et al. Assessing the effectiveness of disease awareness programs: Evidence from Google Trends data for the world awareness dates. Telematics and Informatics 2017;34(7):904-913.
• 8. Jacobsen GD, Jacobsen KH. Health awareness campaigns and diagnosis rates: Evidence from National Breast Cancer Awareness Month. Journal of health economics 2011;30(1):55-61.
• 9. Ayers JW, Westmaas JL, Leas EC, Benton A, Chen Y, Dredze M, et al. Leveraging big data to improve health awareness campaigns: A novel evaluation of the great American smokeout. JMIR public health and surveillance 2016;2(1). doi: 10.2196/publichealth.5304.
• 10. Brownstein JS, Freifeld CC, Madoff LC. Digital disease detection—harnessing the Web for public health surveillance. The New England journal of medicine 2009;360(21):2153-2157.
• 11. Ekman A, Litton JE. New times, new needs; E-epidemiology. European journal of epidemiology 2007;22(5):285-292.
• 12. Salathe M, Bengtsson L, Bodnar TJ, Brewer DD, Brownstein JS, Buckee, C. et al. Digital epidemiology. PLoS computational biology 2012;8(7). doi:10.1371/journal.pcbi.1002616.
• 13. Ginsberg J, Mohebbi MH, Patel RS, Brammer L, Smolinski MS, Brilliant L. Detecting influenza epidemics using search engine query data. Nature 2009;457(7232):1012-1014.
• 14. Doornik JA. Improving the timeliness of data on influenza-like illnesses using Google search data. Working paper, 2009.
• 15. Carneiro HA, Mylonakis E. Google trends: A web-based tool for real-time surveillance of disease outbreaks. Clinical infectious diseases 2009;49(10):1557-1564.
• 16. Cook S, Conrad C, Fowlkes AL, Mohebbi MH. Assessing Google flu trends performance in the United States during the 2009 influenza virus A (H1N1) pandemic. PloS one 2011;6(8). doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0023610.
• 17. Bakker KM, Martinez-Bakker ME, Helm B, Stevenson TJ. Digital epidemiology reveals global childhood disease seasonality and the effects of immunization. Proc Natl Acad Sci 2016;113(24):6689-6694.
• 18. Google: Google Trends. Erişim: https://trends.google.com.tr/
• 19. Choi H, Varian H. Predicting the present with Google Trends. Economic record 2012;88:2-9.
• 20. Paluck EL, Lagunes P, Green DP, Vavreck L, Peer L, Gomila R. Does product placement change television viewers’ social behavior? PloS one 2015;10(9). doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0138610
• 21. Vaughan L, Romero‐Frías E. Web search volume as a predictor of academic fame: An exploration of Google trends. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology 2014;65(4):707-720.
• 22. Almeida A, Orduña P, Castillejo E, López-de-Ipiña D, Sacristán M. A method for automatic generation of fuzzy membership functions for mobile device’s characteristics based on Google Trends. Computers in Human Behavior 2013;29(2):510-517.
• 23. Mellon J. Where and when can we use Google Trends to measure issue salience? PS: Political Science & Politics 2013;46(2):280-290.
• 24. Linkov F, Bovbjerg DH, Freese KE, Ramanathan R, Eid GM, Gourash W. Bariatric surgery interest around the world: What Google Trends can teach us. Surgery for Obesity and Related Diseases 2014;10(3):533-538.
• 25. Liu M. Evaluating the effectiveness of health awareness events based on google search frequency. (Master of Science Thesis), Xijin Ge, Unpublished thesis, South Dakota, 2015.
• 26. Ling R, Lee J. Disease monitoring and health campaign evaluation using Google search activities for HIV and AIDS, stroke, colorectal cancer, and marijuana use in Canada: A retrospective observational study. JMIR public health and surveillance 2016;2(2). doi:10.2196/publichealth.6504.
• 27. Phillips CA, Leahy AB, Li Y, Schapira MM, Bailey LC, Merchant RM. Relationship between state-level Google online search volume and cancer incidence in the United States: Retrospective study. Journal of medical internet research 2018;20(1):1-9.
• 28. Lippi G, Mattiuzzi C, Cervellin G. Do “Disease Awareness Days” Work? A 5-Year Investigation Using Google Trends. Journal of Epidemiology and Global Health 2020. doi:10.2991/jegh.k.200218.001.
• 29. Shariatpanahi SP, Jafari A, Sadeghipour M, Azadeh-Fard N, Majidzadeh-A K, Farahmand L. et al. Assessing the effectiveness of disease awareness programs: Evidence from Google Trends data for the world awareness dates. Telematics and Informatics 2017;34(7):904-913.
• 30. Oraee D, Reeves B, Torgerson T, Ottwell R, Vassar M. Analysis of awareness months using Google Trends. Poster presented at Research Day at Oklahoma State University Center for Health Sciences, Oklahoma, 2020. Erişim Yeri: https://shareok.org/bitstream/handle/11244/324230/ouhd_oraee_analysisofawarenessmonths_2020.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y