scholarly journals Googling Musculoskeletal-Related Pain and Ranking of Medical Associations’ Patient Information Pages: Google Ads Keyword Planner Analysis

10.2196/18684 ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 22 (8) ◽  
pp. e18684
Author(s):  
Yoichiro Yamaguchi ◽  
Deokcheol Lee ◽  
Takuya Nagai ◽  
Taro Funamoto ◽  
Takuya Tajima ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Search Engine ◽  
Medical Information ◽  
The United States ◽  
Online Information ◽  
Search Results ◽  
Medical Associations ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Google Search ◽  
Information Providers

Background Most people currently use the internet to obtain information about many subjects, including health information. Thus, medical associations need to provide accurate medical information websites. Although medical associations have their own patient education pages, it is not clear if these websites actually show up in search results. Objective The aim of this study was to evaluate how well medical associations function as online information providers by searching for information about musculoskeletal-related pain online and determining the ranking of the websites of medical associations. Methods We conducted a Google search for frequently searched keywords. Keywords were extracted using Google Ads Keyword Planner associated with “pain” relevant to the musculoskeletal system from June 2016 to December 2019. The top 20 search queries were extracted and searched using the Google search engine in Japan and the United States. Results The number of suggested queries for “pain” provided by Google Ads Keyword Planner was 930 in the United States and 2400 in Japan. Among the top 20 musculoskeletal-related pain queries chosen, the probability that the medical associations’ websites would appear in the top 10 results was 30% in the United States and 45% in Japan. In five queries each, the associations’ websites did not appear among the top 100 results. No significant difference was found in the rank of the associations’ website search results (P=.28). Conclusions To provide accurate medical information to patients, it is essential to undertake effective measures for search engine optimization. For orthopedic associations, it is necessary that their websites should appear among the top search results.

scholarly journals Googling Musculoskeletal-Related Pain and Ranking of Medical Associations’ Patient Information Pages: Google Ads Keyword Planner Analysis (Preprint)

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yoichiro Yamaguchi ◽  
Deokcheol Lee ◽  
Takuya Nagai ◽  
Taro Funamoto ◽  
Takuya Tajima ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Search Engine ◽  
Medical Information ◽  
The United States ◽  
Online Information ◽  
Search Results ◽  
Medical Associations ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Google Search ◽  
Information Providers

BACKGROUND Most people currently use the internet to obtain information about many subjects, including health information. Thus, medical associations need to provide accurate medical information websites. Although medical associations have their own patient education pages, it is not clear if these websites actually show up in search results. OBJECTIVE The aim of this study was to evaluate how well medical associations function as online information providers by searching for information about musculoskeletal-related pain online and determining the ranking of the websites of medical associations. METHODS We conducted a Google search for frequently searched keywords. Keywords were extracted using Google Ads Keyword Planner associated with “pain” relevant to the musculoskeletal system from June 2016 to December 2019. The top 20 search queries were extracted and searched using the Google search engine in Japan and the United States. RESULTS The number of suggested queries for “pain” provided by Google Ads Keyword Planner was 930 in the United States and 2400 in Japan. Among the top 20 musculoskeletal-related pain queries chosen, the probability that the medical associations’ websites would appear in the top 10 results was 30% in the United States and 45% in Japan. In five queries each, the associations’ websites did not appear among the top 100 results. No significant difference was found in the rank of the associations’ website search results (<i>P</i>=.28). CONCLUSIONS To provide accurate medical information to patients, it is essential to undertake effective measures for search engine optimization. For orthopedic associations, it is necessary that their websites should appear among the top search results.

OPTIMASI RISET KEYWORD DENGAN TEKNIK ALLINTITLLE PADA MESIN PENCARI GOOGLE

2018 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-5
Author(s):  
Hengki Tamando Sihotang
Keyword(s):  
Search Engine ◽  
Information Needs ◽  
Research Question ◽  
Online Information ◽  
Web Based ◽  
Development Method ◽  
Government Services ◽  
Search Results ◽  
Google Search ◽  
The Web

Online information needs have evolved in the real direction. These needs include the latest information, government services, and commercial products. The research question is how to describe and optimize keyword research with the allintitle technique on the google search engine. The development method used in this research is the prototype method because it is considered able to be evaluated directly on the user. The system testing is done for 3 months by placing keywords on several websites on Google. The conclusion that can be taken is to use the allintitle technique, the search results for the web are easier to find. And this web-based allintitle technique can overcome the challenges of captcha verification from the Google search engine.   Keywords: Allintitle, Google's Search Engine, Keyword competition.

scholarly journals Online Information About Periviable Birth: Quality Assessment (Preprint)

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adriane F Haragan ◽  
Carly A Zuwiala ◽  
Katherine P Himes
Keyword(s):  
Medical Information ◽  
The United States ◽  
The Internet ◽  
Online Information ◽  
High Quality ◽  
Comfort Care ◽  
Treatment Choices ◽  
News Stories ◽  
Google Search

BACKGROUND Over 20,000 parents in the United States face the challenge of participating in decisions about whether to use life support for their infants born on the cusp of viability every year. Clinicians must help families grasp complex medical information about their baby’s immediate prognosis as well as the risk for significant long-term morbidity. Patients faced with this decision want supplemental information and frequently seek medical information on the Internet. Empirical evidence about the quality of websites is lacking. OBJECTIVE We sought to evaluate the quality of online information available about periviable birth and treatment options for infants born at the cusp of viability. METHODS We read a counseling script to 20 pregnant participants that included information typically provided by perinatal and neonatal providers when periviable birth is imminent. The women were then asked to list terms they would use to search the Internet if they wanted additional information. Using these search terms, two reviewers evaluated the content of websites obtained via a Google search. We used two metrics to assess the quality of websites. The first was the DISCERN instrument, a validated questionnaire designed to assess the quality of patient-targeted health information for treatment choices. The second metric was the Essential Content Tool (ECT), a tool designed to address key components of counseling around periviable birth as outlined by professional organizations. DISCERN scores were classified as low quality if scores were 2, fair quality if scores were 3, and high quality if scores were 4 or higher. Scores of 6 or higher on the ECT were considered high quality. Interreviewer agreement was assessed by calculated kappa statistic. RESULTS A total of 97 websites were reviewed. Over half (57/97, 59%) were for-profit sites, news stories, or personal blogs; 28% (27/97) were government or medical sites; and 13% (13/97) were nonprofit or advocacy sites. The majority of sites scored poorly in DISCERN questions designed to assess the reliability of information presented as well as data regarding treatment choices. Only 7% (7/97) of the websites were high quality as defined by the DISCERN tool. The majority of sites did not address the essential content defined by the ECT. Importantly, only 18% of websites (17/97) indicated that there are often a number of reasonable approaches to newborn care when faced with periviable birth. Agreement was strong, with kappa ranging from .72 to .91. CONCLUSIONS Most information about periviable birth found on the Internet using common search strategies is of low quality. News stories highlighting positive outcomes are disproportionately represented. Few websites discuss comfort care or how treatment decisions impact quality of life.

scholarly journals Online Readability of COVID-19 Health Information: a Comparison between Four English Speaking Countries

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Amy P Worrall ◽  
Mary J Connolly ◽  
Aine O'Neill ◽  
Murray O'Doherty ◽  
Kenneth P Thornton ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
United Kingdom ◽  
Health Information ◽  
General Public ◽  
Information Source ◽  
The United States ◽  
Online Information ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
English Speaking

Abstract Introduction: The internet is now the first line source of health information for many people worldwide. In the current Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) global pandemic, health information is being produced, revised, updated and disseminated at an increasingly rapid rate. The general public are faced with a plethora of misinformation regarding COVID-19 and the readability of online information has an impact on their understanding of the disease. The accessibility of online healthcare information relating to COVID-19 is unknown. We sought to evaluate the readability of online information relating to COVID-19 in four English speaking regions: Ireland, the United Kingdom, Canada and the United States, and compare readability of website source provenance and regional origin.Methods: The Google® search engine was used to collate the first twenty webpage URLs for three individual searches for ‘COVID’, ‘COVID-19’, and ‘coronavirus’ from Ireland, the United Kingdom, Canada and the United States. The Gunning Fog Index (GFI), Flesch-Kincaid Grade (FKG) Score, Flesch Reading Ease Score (FRES), Simple Measure of Gobbledygook (SMOG) score were calculated to assess the readability. Results: There were poor levels of readability webpages reviewed, with only 17.2% of webpages at a universally readable level. There was a significant difference in readability between the different webpages based on their information source (p <0.01). Public Health organisations and Government organisations provided the most readable COVID-19 material, while digital media sources were significantly less readable. There were no significant differences in readability between regions. Conclusion: Much of the general public have relied on online information during the pandemic. Information on COVID-19 should be made more readable, and those writing webpages and information tools should ensure universal accessibility is considered in their production. Governments and healthcare practitioners should have an awareness of the online sources of information available, and ensure that readability of our own productions is at a universally readable level which will increase understanding and adherence to health guidelines.

A cross-sectional study on quality of diabetes information identified from the Internet (Preprint)

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jingchun Fan ◽  
Jean Craig ◽  
Na Zhao ◽  
Fujian Song
Keyword(s):  
Health Information ◽  
Search Engine ◽  
Search Engines ◽  
The Internet ◽  
Online Health Information ◽  
Online Information ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Content Coverage ◽  
Google Search

BACKGROUND Increasingly people seek health information from the Internet, in particular, health information on diseases that require intensive self-management, such as diabetes. However, the Internet is largely unregulated and the quality of online health information may not be credible. OBJECTIVE To assess the quality of online information on diabetes identified from the Internet. METHODS We used the single term “diabetes” or equivalent Chinese characters to search Google and Baidu respectively. The first 50 websites retrieved from each of the two search engines were screened for eligibility using pre-determined inclusion and exclusion criteria. Included websites were assessed on four domains: accessibility, content coverage, validity and readability. RESULTS We included 26 websites from Google search engine and 34 from Baidu search engine. There were significant differences in website provider (P<0.0001), but not in targeted population (P=0.832) and publication types (P=0.378), between the two search engines. The website accessibility was not statistically significantly different between the two search engines, although there were significant differences in items regarding website content coverage. There was no statistically significant difference in website validity between the Google and Baidu search engines (mean Discern score 3.3 vs 2.9, p=0.156). The results to appraise readability for English website showed that that Flesch Reading Ease scores ranged from 23.1 to 73.0 and the mean score of Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level ranged range from 5.7 to 19.6. CONCLUSIONS The content coverage of the health information for patients with diabetes in English search engine tended to be more comprehensive than that from Chinese search engine. There was a lack of websites provided by health organisations in China. The quality of online health information for people with diabetes needs to be improved to bridge the knowledge gap between website service and public demand.

Public Health Implications of Google Searches for Sunscreen, Sunburn, Skin Cancer, and Melanoma in the United States

2018 ◽  
Vol 33 (4) ◽  
pp. 611-615 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zachary H. Hopkins ◽  
Aaron M. Secrest
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
United States ◽  
Skin Cancer ◽  
Search Engine ◽  
State Level ◽  
The United States ◽  
Google Trends ◽  
Search Term ◽  
Melanoma Incidence ◽  
Google Search

Purpose: Google Trends (GT) offers insights into public interests and behaviors and holds potential for guiding public health campaigns. We evaluated trends in US searches for sunscreen, sunburn, skin cancer, and melanoma and their relationships with melanoma outcomes. Design: Google Trends was queried for US search volumes from 2004 to 2017. Time-matched search term data were correlated with melanoma outcomes data from Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results Program and United States Cancer Statistics databases (2004-2014 and 2010-2014, respectively). Setting: Users of the Google search engine in the United States. Participants: Google search engine users in the United States. This represents approximately 65% of the population. Measures: Search volumes, melanoma outcomes. Analysis: Pearson correlations between search term volumes, time, and national melanoma outcomes. Spearman correlations between state-level search data and melanoma outcomes. Results: The terms “sunscreen,” “sunburn,” “skin cancer,” and “melanoma” were all highly correlated ( P < .001), with sunscreen and sunburn having the greatest correlation ( r = 0.95). Sunscreen/sunburn searches have increased over time, but skin cancer/melanoma searches have decreased ( P < .05). Nationally, sunscreen, sunburn, and skin cancer were significantly correlated with melanoma incidence. At the state level, only sunscreen and melanoma searches were significantly correlated with melanoma incidence. Conclusions: We conclude that online skin cancer prevention campaigns should focus on the search terms “sunburn” and “sunscreen,” given the decreasing online searches for skin cancer and melanoma. This is reinforced by the finding that sunscreen searches are higher in areas with higher melanoma incidence.

scholarly journals Readability of Online COVID-19 Health Information: A Comparison between Four English Speaking Countries

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Amy P Worrall ◽  
Mary J Connolly ◽  
Aine O'Neill ◽  
Murray O'Doherty ◽  
Kenneth P Thornton ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
United Kingdom ◽  
Health Information ◽  
General Public ◽  
Information Source ◽  
The United States ◽  
Online Information ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
English Speaking

Abstract Background: The internet is now the first line source of health information for many people worldwide. In the current Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) global pandemic, health information is being produced, revised, updated and disseminated at an increasingly rapid rate. The general public are faced with a plethora of misinformation regarding COVID-19 and the readability of online information has an impact on their understanding of the disease. The accessibility of online healthcare information relating to COVID-19 is unknown. We sought to evaluate the readability of online information relating to COVID-19 in four English speaking regions: Ireland, the United Kingdom, Canada and the United States, and compare readability of website source provenance and regional origin.Methods: The Google® search engine was used to collate the first twenty webpage URLs for three individual searches for ‘COVID’, ‘COVID-19’, and ‘coronavirus’ from Ireland, the United Kingdom, Canada and the United States. The Gunning Fog Index (GFI), Flesch-Kincaid Grade (FKG) Score, Flesch Reading Ease Score (FRES), Simple Measure of Gobbledygook (SMOG) score were calculated to assess the readability. Results: There were poor levels of readability webpages reviewed, with only 17.2% of webpages at a universally readable level. There was a significant difference in readability between the different webpages based on their information source (p <0.01). Public Health organisations and Government organisations provided the most readable COVID-19 material, while digital media sources were significantly less readable. There were no significant differences in readability between regions. Conclusion: Much of the general public have relied on online information during the pandemic. Information on COVID-19 should be made more readable, and those writing webpages and information tools should ensure universal accessibility is considered in their production. Governments and healthcare practitioners should have an awareness of the online sources of information available, and ensure that readability of our own productions is at a universally readable level which will increase understanding and adherence to health guidelines.

scholarly journals Readability of online COVID-19 health information: a comparison between four English speaking countries

2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Amy P. Worrall ◽  
Mary J. Connolly ◽  
Aine O’Neill ◽  
Murray O’Doherty ◽  
Kenneth P. Thornton ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
United Kingdom ◽  
Health Information ◽  
General Public ◽  
Information Source ◽  
The United States ◽  
Online Information ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
English Speaking

Abstract Background The internet is now the first line source of health information for many people worldwide. In the current Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) global pandemic, health information is being produced, revised, updated and disseminated at an increasingly rapid rate. The general public are faced with a plethora of misinformation regarding COVID-19 and the readability of online information has an impact on their understanding of the disease. The accessibility of online healthcare information relating to COVID-19 is unknown. We sought to evaluate the readability of online information relating to COVID-19 in four English speaking regions: Ireland, the United Kingdom, Canada and the United States, and compare readability of website source provenance and regional origin. Methods The Google® search engine was used to collate the first 20 webpage URLs for three individual searches for ‘COVID’, ‘COVID-19’, and ‘coronavirus’ from Ireland, the United Kingdom, Canada and the United States. The Gunning Fog Index (GFI), Flesch-Kincaid Grade (FKG) Score, Flesch Reading Ease Score (FRES), Simple Measure of Gobbledygook (SMOG) score were calculated to assess the readability. Results There were poor levels of readability webpages reviewed, with only 17.2% of webpages at a universally readable level. There was a significant difference in readability between the different webpages based on their information source (p < 0.01). Public Health organisations and Government organisations provided the most readable COVID-19 material, while digital media sources were significantly less readable. There were no significant differences in readability between regions. Conclusion Much of the general public have relied on online information during the pandemic. Information on COVID-19 should be made more readable, and those writing webpages and information tools should ensure universal accessibility is considered in their production. Governments and healthcare practitioners should have an awareness of the online sources of information available, and ensure that readability of our own productions is at a universally readable level which will increase understanding and adherence to health guidelines.

scholarly journals The unmet needs of carers of stroke survivors: An evaluation of Google search results

2019 ◽  
Vol 26 (2) ◽  
pp. 934-944 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexandra MJ Denham ◽  
Olivia Wynne ◽  
Amanda L Baker ◽  
Neil J Spratt ◽  
Billie Bonevski
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Unmet Needs ◽  
The United States ◽  
Stroke Survivors ◽  
Discussion Boards ◽  
Online Forums ◽  
Search Results ◽  
The World ◽  
Google Search ◽  
Insight Into

Google is the most used search engine in the world, and likely to be used by caregivers of stroke survivors to find online forums and online communities to connect with other caregivers. This study aims to identify the types of websites accessed by caregivers of stroke survivors to connect with other caregivers, and analyse the online content produced by caregivers to identify their unmet needs. The first 20 websites from eight search strings entered into Google were systematically reviewed. Unmet needs on included websites were identified using a pre-determined coding schedule. Six websites were analysed. Most were discussion boards (n = 5, 83%) developed by organisations in the United States (n = 4, 66.6%). Overall, 2124 unmet needs appeared in 896 posts from caregivers. ‘Emotional and psychological’ were the most reported needs across posts (n = 765, 36%). Content produced on websites may address social isolation and provide insight into delivering and developing services to meet the needs of caregivers of stroke survivors.

scholarly journals Google and Women’s Health-Related Issues: What Does the Search Engine Data Reveal?

2014 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Haim Arie Abenhaim ◽  
Mazin Baazeem
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Ovarian Cancer ◽  
Women’S Health ◽  
Women's Health ◽  
Search Engine ◽  
Daily Practice ◽  
The United States ◽  
Search Volume ◽  
Health Related ◽  
Google Search

Objectives: Identifying the gaps in public knowledge of women’s health related issues has always been difficult. With the increasing number of Internet users in the United States, we sought to use the Internet as a tool to help us identify such gaps and to estimate women’s most prevalent health concerns by examining commonly searched health-related keywords in Google search engine. Methods: We collected a large pool of possible search keywords from two independent practicing obstetrician/gynecologists and classified them into five main categories (obstetrics, gynecology, infertility, urogynecology/menopause and oncology), and measured the monthly average search volume within the United States for each keyword with all its possible combinations using Google AdWords tool. Results: We found that pregnancy related keywords were less frequently searched in general compared to other categories with an average of 145,400 hits per month for the top twenty keywords. Among the most common pregnancy-related keywords was “pregnancy and sex’ while pregnancy-related diseases were uncommonly searched. HPV alone was searched 305,400 times per month. Of the cancers affecting women, breast cancer was the most commonly searched with an average of 247,190 times per month, followed by cervical cancer then ovarian cancer. Conclusion: The commonly searched keywords are often issues that are not discussed in our daily practice as well as in public health messages. The search volume is relatively related to disease prevalence with the exception of ovarian cancer which could signify a public fear.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document