Correlating global trends in COVID-19 cases with online symptom checker self-assessments
PLoS ONE, ISSN: 1932-6203, Vol: 18, Issue: 2 February, Page: e0281709
2023
- 1Citations
- 4Captures
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations1
- Citation Indexes1
- Captures4
- Readers4
Article Description
Background Online symptom checkers are digital health solutions that provide a differential diagnosis based on a user’s symptoms. During the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, symptom checkers have become increasingly important due to physical distance constraints and reduced access to in-person medical consultations. Furthermore, various symptom checkers specialised in the assessment of COVID-19 infection have been produced. Objectives Assess the correlation between COVID-19 risk assessments from an online symptom checker and current trends in COVID-19 infections. Analyse whether those correlations are reflective of various country-wise quality of life measures. Lastly, determine whether the trends found in symptom checker assessments predict or lag relative to those of the COVID-19 infections. Materials and methods In this study, we compile the outcomes of COVID-19 risk assessments provided by the symptom checker Symptoma (www.symptoma.com) in 18 countries with suitably large user bases. We analyse this dataset’s spatial and temporal features compared to the number of newly confirmed COVID-19 cases published by the respective countries. Results We find an average correlation of 0.342 between the number of Symptoma users assessed to have a high risk of a COVID-19 infection and the official COVID-19 infection numbers. Further, we show a significant relationship between that correlation and the self-reported health of a country. Lastly, we find that the symptom checker is, on average, ahead (median +3 days) of the official infection numbers for most countries. Conclusion We show that online symptom checkers can capture the national-level trends in coronavirus infections. As such, they provide a valuable and unique information source in policymaking against pandemics, unrestricted by conventional resources.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85147888381&origin=inward; http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0281709; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36763699; https://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0281709; https://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0281709; https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0281709
Public Library of Science (PLoS)
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know